Discovery Box| (0.25) | (2Ki 17:21) | 2 tc The consonantal text (Kethib) assumes the verb is נָדָא (nadaʾ), an alternate form of נָדָה (nadah), “push away.” The marginal reading (Qere) assumes the verb נָדָח (nadakh), “drive away.” |
| (0.25) | (2Ki 13:9) | 3 tn Heb “Joash,” an alternate form of the name “Jehoash.” For clarity, the translation consistently uses “Jehoash” for the son of Jehoahaz King of Israel in 13:9, 12, 13, 14, 25. |
| (0.25) | (2Ki 11:18) | 3 tn The Hebrew construction translated “smashed…to bits” is emphatic. The adverbial infinitive absolute (הֵיטֵב [hetev], “well”) accompanying the Piel form of the verb שָׁבַר (shavar), “break,” suggests thorough demolition. |
| (0.25) | (2Ki 7:10) | 1 tn The MT has a singular form (“gatekeeper”), but the context suggests a plural. The pronoun that follows (“them”) is plural and a plural noun appears in v. 11. The Syriac Peshitta and the Targum have the plural here. |
| (0.25) | (2Ki 3:19) | 2 tn Elisha places the object first and uses an imperfect verb form. The stylistic shift may signal that he is now instructing them what to do, rather than merely predicting what would happen. |
| (0.25) | (1Ki 12:26) | 2 tn Heb “Now the kingdom could return to the house of David.” The imperfect verbal form translated “could return” is understood as having a potential force here. Perhaps this is not strong enough; another option is “will return.” |
| (0.25) | (1Ki 12:2) | 2 tn Heb “and Jeroboam lived in Egypt.” The parallel text in 2 Chr 10:2 reads, “and Jeroboam returned from Egypt.” In a purely consonantal text the forms “and he lived” and “and he returned” are identical (וישׁב). |
| (0.25) | (1Ki 3:4) | 2 tn Or, “customarily offered up.” The verb form is an imperfect, which is probably used here in a customary sense to indicate continued or repeated action in past time. See GKC 314 §107.b. |
| (0.25) | (2Sa 22:19) | 1 tn The same verb is translated “trapped” in v. 6. In this poetic narrative context the prefixed verbal form is best understood as a preterite indicating past tense, not imperfect. Cf. NAB, NCV, TEV, NLT “attacked.” |
| (0.25) | (2Sa 22:17) | 1 tn Heb “stretched.” Perhaps “his hand” should be supplied by ellipsis (see Ps 144:7). In this poetic narrative context the three prefixed verbal forms in this verse are best understood as preterites indicating past tense, not imperfects. |
| (0.25) | (2Sa 22:4) | 1 tn In this song of thanksgiving, where David recalls how the Lord delivered him, the prefixed verbal form is best understood as a preterite indicating past tense (cf. CEV “I prayed”), not an imperfect (as in many English versions). |
| (0.25) | (2Sa 22:5) | 1 tn The noun נַחַל (nakhal) usually refers to a river or stream, but in this context the plural form likely refers to the currents of the sea (see vv. 15-16). |
| (0.25) | (2Sa 20:1) | 2 tn The expression used here יְמִינִי (yemini) is a short form of the more common “Benjamin.” It appears elsewhere in 1 Sam 9:4 and Esth 2:5. Cf. 1 Sam 9:1. |
| (0.25) | (2Sa 15:36) | 1 tn Heb “and you must send by their hand to me every word which you hear.” Both of the second person verb forms are plural with Zadok, Abiathar, and Hushai being the understood subjects. |
| (0.25) | (2Sa 4:7) | 6 sn The rift valley is a large geographic feature extending form Galilee to the gulf of Aqaba. The portion in view here runs along the west of the Dead Sea. |
| (0.25) | (1Sa 15:9) | 3 tc The MT has here the very odd form נְמִבְזָה (nemivzah), but this is apparently due to a scribal error. The translation follows instead the Niphal participle נִבְזָה (nivzah). |
| (0.25) | (1Sa 14:12) | 2 tn The perfect verbal form is used rhetorically here to express Jonathan’s certitude. As far as he is concerned, the victory is as good as won and can be described as such. |
| (0.25) | (1Sa 2:10) | 1 tn The imperfect verbal forms in this line and in the next two lines are understood as indicating what is typically true. Another option is to translate them with the future tense. See v. 10b. |
| (0.25) | (1Sa 2:10) | 4 tn The imperfect verbal forms in this and the next line are understood as indicating what is anticipated and translated with the future tense because at the time of Hannah’s prayer Israel did not yet have a king. |
| (0.25) | (Rut 2:10) | 6 sn The similarly spelled Hebrew terms נָכַר (nakhar, “to notice”) and נָכְרִי (nokhri, “foreigner”) in this verse form a homonymic wordplay. This highlights the unexpected nature of the attentiveness and concern Boaz displayed to Ruth. |
