(0.15) | (Sos 4:3) | 1 tn The phrase חוּט הַשָּׁנִי (khut hashani, “thread of scarlet”) is a genitive construct with the genitive functioning adjectivally. This phrase is used three times in classical Hebrew to denote a scarlet colored “thread” or “cord” (Josh 2:18; Song 4:3; 11 QT 49:3) (HALOT 296-97 s.v. חוּט; DCH 3:170-71 s.v. חוּט). This is a comparison of sight, describing the color and shape of her lips. |
(0.15) | (Sos 2:17) | 1 sn Heb “until the day breathes,” which is figurative (personification) for the morning, that is, the time when the day begin its “life” (e.g., Song 4:6). Likewise, “the shadows flee” is figurative (personification) for the dawn, i.e., the time when the dark shadows of the night disappear, or the shadows of the evening which lengthen and are just as fleeting. |
(0.15) | (Sos 2:7) | 3 sn The “gazelles” and “does of the fields” are probably zoomorphisms for love personified. In other words, the witness of this oath is “love” itself. Should the daughters violate this vow which they are asked to make, “love” itself would hold them accountable. Gazelles were often figures in Hebrew, Akkadian, and Ugaritic literature for mighty warriors or virile young men (e.g., 2 Sam 1:19; 2:18; Isa 14:9; Zech 10:3). |
(0.15) | (Sos 2:3) | 6 sn The term פִּרְיוֹ (piryo, “his fruit”) is a figure for the young man himself or perhaps his kisses which the young woman delights to “taste” (e.g., Song 4:11; 5:13). It is possible to take the imagery of the young woman tasting his “fruit” as kissing. Likewise, the imagery of the gazelles grazing among the lilies is probably a picture of the young man caressing and kissing his beloved (Song 2:16; 6:3). |
(0.15) | (Sos 1:6) | 5 sn The verb הָרָה (harah, “to burn in anger, to be angry”) creates an interesting wordplay or pun on the preceding line: “The sun burned me (= my skin).” The sun burned her skin because her brothers had burned (נִהֲרוּ, niharu) in anger against her. This is an example of a polysemantic wordplay which explains the two basic meanings of הָרָה (“to burn, to be angry”) (W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry [JSOTSup], 241-42). |
(0.15) | (Ecc 12:6) | 2 tn The term גַּלְגַּל (galgal, “wheel”) refers to the “water wheel” or “paddle wheel” for drawing water from a well (HALOT 190 s.v. I גַּלְגַּל 2; BDB 165 s.v. גַּלְגַּל 1.b). This Hebrew noun is related to the Akkadian term gulgullu (“pot”), as well as Phoenician (?) גלגל (“wheel for drawing water”). The Latin term girgillus (“lever for the bucket”) is a late derivation from this term. See G. Dalman, Arbeit und Sitte in Palästina, 2:225-28. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 10:17) | 1 tn Heb “son of nobles”; or “son of freemen.” The term חוֹרִים (khorim) is from חֹר (khor, “noble one; freeman”); cf. HALOT 348 s.v. I חֹר; BDB 359 s.v. I חֹר. It is related to the Aramaic noun חֲרַר (kharar, “freeman”); Sabean חר (“freeman; noble”); Old South Arabic חר and Arabic hurr (“freedom”); cf. HALOT 348 s.v. חֹר; BDB 359 s.v. חֹר. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 10:8) | 1 tn The four imperfect verbs in vv. 8-9 may be nuanced as indicatives (“will…”) or in a modal sense denoting possibility (“may…”). The LXX rendered them with indicatives, as do many English translations (KJV, RSV, NRSV, ASV, MLB, YLT, NJPS). However, it is better to take them in a modal sense (NEB, NAB, NASB, NIV, NCV, CEV, NLT). One who digs a pit does not necessarily fall into it, but he may under the right conditions. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 10:1) | 4 tn The MT reads מֵחָכְמָה מִכָּבוֹד (mekhokhmah mikkavod, “more than wisdom, more than honor”), but several medieval Hebrew mss read מֵחָכְמָה וּמִכָּבוֹד (mekhokhmah umikkavod, “more than wisdom and honor”). However the textual problem is resolved, the two nouns form a hendiadys: two terms joined by vav that describe one concept. The first noun retains its full nominal sense, while the second functions adjectivally: “heavy wisdom” or better, “great wisdom.” |
(0.15) | (Ecc 8:16) | 4 tn Heb “for no one sees sleep with their eyes either day or night.” The construction גַםכִּי (ki gam) expresses a concessive sense: “even though” (e.g., Ps 23:4; Prov 22:6; Eccl 4:14; Isa 1:15; Lam 3:8; Hos 8:10; 9:16); cf. HALOT 196 s.v. גַּם 9; BDB 169 s.v. גַּם 6; 473 s.v. כִּי 2.c. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 7:5) | 3 tn Or “praise.” The antithetical parallelism between “rebuke” (גַּעֲרַת, gaʿarat) and “song” (שִׁיר, shir) suggests that the latter is figurative (metonymy of association) for praise/flattery which is “music” to the ears: “praise of fools” (NEB, NJPS) and “flattery of fools” (Douay). However, the collocation of “song” (שִׁיר) in 7:5 with “laughter” (שְׂחֹק, sekhoq) in 7:6 suggests simply frivolous merrymaking: “song of fools” (KJV, NASB, NIV, ASV, RSV, NRSV). |
(0.15) | (Ecc 5:19) | 1 tn The syntax of this verse is difficult. The best approach is to view הִשְׁלִיטוֹ (hishlito, “he has given him the ability”) as governing the three following infinitives: לֶאֱכֹל (leʾekhol, “to eat”), וְלָשֵׂאת (velaseʾt, “and to lift” = “to accept [or receive]”), and וְלִשְׂמֹחַ (velismoakh, “and to rejoice”). This statement parallels 2:24-26 which states that no one can find enjoyment in life unless God gives him the ability to do so. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 5:8) | 2 tn Heb “robbery.” The noun גֵזֶל (gezel, “robbery”) refers to the wrestling away of righteousness or the perversion of justice (HALOT 186 s.v. גֵּזֶל). The related forms of the root גזל mean “to rob; to loot” (HALOT 186 s.v. גֵּזֶל). The term “robbery” is used as a figure for the perversion of justice (hypocatastasis): just as a thief robs his victims through physical violence, so corrupt government officials “rob” the poor through the perversion of justice. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 3:6) | 1 tn The term לְאַבֵּד (leʾabbed, Piel infinitive construct from אָבַד, ʾavad, “to destroy”) means “to lose” (e.g., Jer 23:1) as the contrast with בָּקַשׁ (baqash, “to seek to find”) indicates (HALOT 3 s.v. I אבד; BDB 2 s.v. אבד 3). This is the declarative or delocutive-estimative sense of the Piel: “to view something as lost” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 28, §145; IBHS 403 §24.2g). |
(0.15) | (Ecc 2:18) | 7 tn The verb נוּחַ (nuakh, “to rest”) denotes “to leave [something] behind” in the hands of someone (e.g., Ps 119:121; Eccl 2:18); see HALOT 680 s.v. נוח B.2.c. The imperfect functions in a modal sense of obligation or necessity. At death, Qoheleth will be forced to pass on his entire estate and the fruit of his labors to his successor. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 2:11) | 4 tn The term הַכֹּל (hakkol, “everything” or “all”) must be qualified and limited in reference to the topic that is dealt with in 2:4-11. This is an example of synecdoche of general for the specific; the general term “all” is used only in reference to the topic at hand. This is clear from the repetition of כֹּל (kol, “everything”) and (“all these things”) in 2:11. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 2:3) | 7 tn Heb “and my heart was leading along in wisdom.” The vav + noun, וְלִבִּי (velibbi) introduces a disjunctive, parenthetical clause designed to qualify the speaker’s remarks lest he be misunderstood: “Now my heart/mind….” He emphasizes that he never lost control of his senses in this process. It was a purely mental, cognitive endeavor; he never actually gave himself over to wanton self-indulgence in wine or folly. |
(0.15) | (Ecc 1:13) | 8 tn The syntax of this line in Hebrew is intentionally redundant, e.g. (literally), “It is a grievous task [or “unpleasant business”] that God has given to the sons of man to be occupied with it.” The referent of the third masculine singular suffix on לַעֲנוֹת בּוֹ (laʿanot bo, “to be occupied with it”) is עִנְיַן רָע (ʿinyan raʿ, “a grievous task, a rotten business”). |
(0.15) | (Ecc 1:13) | 1 tn Heb “I gave my heart” or “I set my mind.” The term לִבִּי (libbi, “my heart”) is an example of synecdoche of part (heart) for the whole (myself). Qoheleth uses this figurative expression frequently in the book. On the other hand, in Hebrew mentality, the term “heart” is frequently associated with one’s thoughts and reasoning; thus, this might be a metonymy of association (heart = thoughts). The equivalent English idiom would be “I applied my mind.” |
(0.15) | (Pro 31:10) | 3 tn The first word in the Hebrew text (אֵשֶׁת, ʾeshet) begins with א (ʾalef), the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet. The word אֵשֶׁת, (ʾeshet) can refer to a wife or to a woman. Ruth is called an אֵשֶׁת חַיִל (ʾeshet khayil) “worthy woman” while still a widow. While the term need not refer to a wife, that was certainly the most common status of the adult woman in ancient Israel and the following description portrays a woman who is both wife and mother. |