Estudios filológicos, № 33, 1998

148 _{See Blommerde, 1969: 25–26; and Dahood and Penar, 1970: 435–437.} 149 _{Given the fact that b was used as direct object indicator with only a very} limited number of verbs (see BDB, 90, section IV), Trafton’s (1985: 132 ) interpretation that the Syriac translator correctly read _b as a direct object sign with

hwx must be accepted with caution.

the Syriac has a preposition. Kuhn (1937: 34–35), followed by Trafton (1985: 131–132), reconstructed for this phrase and the next the following Vorlage for the Greek:

wytwqjqdxb !yklwhl!yyjl

wnl hwx hrwtb

and the almost identical Vorlage for the Syriac:

!yyjl wnl hwx hrwt wytwqjb qdxb !yklwhl

, differing only on the location of the second prepositional

b

.

It is most likely that the early translators interpreted the text by what modern grammarians call “the double–duty preposition,”148

where a preposition in one stich controlled a noun in the next or previous stich. If the

b

of

qdxb

was read as a double duty preposi- tion, the translations could have differed with reference to the second noun which the

b

controlled. It appears that the Syriac read a double– duty

b

and applied it to the next word, making it appositional and precluding

qdx

from being read as a construct noun. But the Greek translator, seemingly, applied the double–duty

b

to the next stich.149

The parenthetical “(according to)” in the reconstructed Vorlage is the equivalent of the double–duty

b

of

qdxb

.

14:2b

ejn novmw/ w|/ ejneteivlato hJmi'n eij" zwh;n hJmw'n in the law which he has commanded for our life.

NII{| N| bHi A*W~] he gave us the law for life

wntwyjl wnyla hrwth hwx

he commanded the Torah for us to live by

As noted in the paragraph above, the Greek ejn has no corres- ponding preposition in the Syriac. The translations also differ with respect to the whether the word for “life” had a modifier. Greek has eij" zwh;n hJmw'n “for our life” but Syriac has simply NII{| “for life.”

THE PSALMS OF SOLOMON

150 _{Compare Frankenberg, 1896: 79.} 151 _{See Delitzsch, 1920: 113, § 114}a–c_.

The reconstructed Vorlage follows the Greek text, using

wntwyjl

, which was translated as the infinitive “for us to live by” (following Franz Delitzsch [n.d., ad loc.] and Stein [1969: 454]), even though

wntwyjl

could also be read as the preposition attached to the suffixed abstract noun “for our living” (as in II Samuel 20:3).150

14:6b (G), 14:4b (S)

oi} hjgavphsan hJmevran ejn metoch'/ aJmartiva" aujtw'n who love (to spend) the day in sharing their sin )H_}d A\bWOb A#Wi WB})d n W]h

those who love the day in the approval of sin

!hyafh trbj !mwy !ybhah

who daily love the fellowship of their (fellow) sinners

The Syriac )H_}d A\bWOb “in the approval of sin” and the Greek ejn metoch'/ aJmartiva" “in sharing sin” cannot be accurate translations of each other. The difference between them can readily be accounted for by assuming a Vorlage with

rbjb

“in fellowship with” (= ejn metoch'), which — due to a metathesis of

j

and

b

— became

rjbb

“in choosing” (= _{A\bWOb). A similar confusion of}

rbj

and

rjb

is attested in I Samuel 20:30, where the MT reads

yv'yIA@b,l] hT;a' rjeboAyKi

“I know that you have chosen the son of Jesse,” but the LXX reads ga;r oi\da o{ti mevtoco" ei\su; tw'/ uiJw'/ Iessai “for I know that you are an accomplice of the son of Jesse.” Another example is in Ecclesiastes 9:4, “but he who is joined with all the living has hope,” where the MT has a Qerec_{/ Ketîb variant read-}

ing

rB'juyÒ

“is joined” for

rjeB;yI

“is chosen.”

The phrase

!hyafh trbj !mwy

in the Vorlage assumes that

. . .

!wy

b

(= hJmevran ejn) was a misreading of an original . . .

!mwy

“daily,” being another example of the confusion of

!

/

m

and

b

.151

The noun in the Vorlage that was translated by aJmartiva" and by )H_} was probably the plural of

aF;j'

“sinner” rather than

af]je

or

PSALM FOURTEEN

ha;f;j}

“sin.” The aujtw'n properly reflects a

!h

3mpl suffix, although there is no corresponding suffix in the Syriac.

14:7 (G), 4:4c (S)

ejn mikrovthti sapriva" hJ ejpiqumiva aujtw'n their enjoyment is brief and decaying n wh+;r )+&Ibd RI; h=wrW`Zb

for their desire is in the brevity of evil

@wjrsw f[m !tdmj yk

for their enjoyment is worthless and offensive

The Greek sapriva" “decaying” and the Syriac )+&Ib “evil” are not translations of each other. Kuhn (1937: 37–38) proposed a

Vorlage with

hmr

“to decay, to putrefy” which the Greek correctly

translated as sapriva", but was misread by the Syriac translator as

h[r

“evil, bad” and translated accordingly as _{)+&Ib “bad, evil”.} However, Delitzsch (1920) did not cite a single example of the confusion of

m

and

[

in the entire Biblical text. Thus, while a

hmr

/

h[r

error is possible, it seems unlikely.

However, a Vorlage with

jrs

could account for the differences. The root

jrs

has several meanings, including (1) “to decay,” which would have been the basis for the Greek text’s having sapriva" “decaying”; (2) “to offend, to sin,” which would have been the basis for the Syriac text’s having _{)+&Ib “bad, evil”; (3) “to go free, to} exceed, to be excessive”; and (4) “to intercept, to lacerate” (BDB, 710; Jastrow, 1024). The cognate of

jrs

, xR%, is attested in Syriac, but the Syriac translator might have chosen another stem since _xR% also has a wide variety of meanings (including “to hurt, to injure,” or “to defile [a maiden]” or “to signify, to indicate”) which could lead to an uncertain reading. The Syriac translator’s use of _)+&Ib “evil” would have removed the ambiguity of the Hebrew

jrs

, and at the same time a Vorlage with

jrs

would account for the Greek sapriva" “decaying.”

Wright (1985: 664) omitted the ejn and added a kaiv, both of which are necessary to give meaning to a a text which means literal- ly, “their desire in brevity of decay.” The reconstructed Vorlage shifted the ejn (=

b

) to

yk

“for” and also added a conjunction. The

THE PSALMS OF SOLOMON

152 _{The a of the stem arq has been elided. For instances of this well attested} feature of final a verbs see Delitzsch (1920: 21–22 § 14a–c _{and 36–37 § 31}a–c_), McDaniel (1983: 124, 222 n. 238) and (GKC § 68h.k_).

translation “worthless” reflects a reading of

f[m

in this context as having a qualitative nuance rather than being quantitative.

Psalm Fifteen 15:1

eij" bohvqeian h[lpisa tou' qeou' Iakwb I expected the help of Jacob’s God vWOeid hH|A| +iRo Y]rdWe|w and I called to the God of Jacob for my aid

In document español contemporaneo (página 52-59)