Did the waw in [Dan. v. 8] change?

From: Chris Jacobs (c.t.mjacobs@freeler.nl)
Date: Sat May 29 2004 - 18:06:05 CDT

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Updated Phoenician proposal: confidential?"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <mark@kli.org>
    To: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk@qaya.org>
    Cc: "Peter Constable" <petercon@microsoft.com>; "Unicode List"
    Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 8:04 PM
    Subject: Re: PH technical issues (was RE: Why Fraktur is irrelevant

    > Peter Kirk wrote:
    > > On 27/05/2004 20:10, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
    > >
    > >> ... See http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/t08/t0805.htm for some
    > >> Talmudic discussion of the matter.
    > >>
    > > It is interesting to see there that Daniel 5:8 (compare v.25 - the
    > > event can be dated to October 539 BC) is cited as an example of the
    > > mutual illegibility of palaeo-Hebrew and square Hebrew characters. It
    > > is suggested there that the original writing on the wall, at
    > > Belshazzar's feast, was in square characters which only Daniel could
    > > read. In fact the scenario was more likely the other way round: the
    > > inscription was in palaeo-Hebrew. Daniel, born in the land of Israel,
    > > could probably read these glyphs, but maybe the Babylonian wise men
    > > could not. The language of the inscription is not Hebrew but Aramaic,
    > > but maybe the letters were palaeo-Hebrew. But then the author of the
    > > book of Daniel ascribes Daniel's ability to read the writing not to
    > > the different script but to wisdom given by God.
    > Interesting, no?
    > I just realized that on "p.59" the translation leaves out a verse from
    > Exodus 27:10, claiming it its translation makes no sense. Yes, it
    > does. The verse says "...the hooks of the pillars..." on which R.
    > Eliezer quoting R. Elazar says "just as the pillars didn't change, the
    > hooks didn't change." And this makes sense IF you recall that the word
    > for "hooks of.." is "vavei", the same word as "vavs of..." i.e. the
    > letters "vav" didn't change...

    [Dan. v. 8] "They were not able to read the writing, nor to make its

    The waw which is here translated as "nor". Has it, in this verse, allways
    meant "nor" ?

    Compare Daniel 5:7

    Who can ((read this) ∧(explain it to me)) gets purple and gold and other
    rewards, or something like that.

    I would expect in Daniel 5:8 the logical negation of this, something like:

    They ¬ (were able to ((read the writing) ∧ (make its interpretation)))

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 29 2004 - 18:18:46 CDT