Psalm 78/Notes/Phrasal.v. 71.680895: Difference between revisions
Ian.Atkinson (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{ExegeticalNote |Layer=Phrasal |VerseRange=v. 71 |Text='''v. 71''' – The presence of בְּ with רעה "to shepherd" may highlight the physical contact of leading them (so Jenni 1992, 238). In this case, such a construal would be less prominent in constructions without the preposition (e.g., Gen 30:31, 36; 36:24; 37:12; Exod 3:1; 1 Sam 17:15; 25:6; 2 Sam 5:2; 7:7; Isa 61:5; Jer 3:15; 23:2). For other instances with בְּ, see Gen 37:2; 1 Sam 16:11; 17:34. Although...") |
Ian.Atkinson (talk | contribs) (Edited automatically from page Psalm 78/Diagrams/8.) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Layer=Phrasal | |Layer=Phrasal | ||
|VerseRange=v. 71 | |VerseRange=v. 71 | ||
|Diagram=vv-71-72-None | |||
|Text='''v. 71''' – The presence of בְּ with רעה "to shepherd" may highlight the physical contact of leading them (so Jenni 1992, 238). In this case, such a construal would be less prominent in constructions without the preposition (e.g., Gen 30:31, 36; 36:24; 37:12; Exod 3:1; 1 Sam 17:15; 25:6; 2 Sam 5:2; 7:7; Isa 61:5; Jer 3:15; 23:2). For other instances with בְּ, see Gen 37:2; 1 Sam 16:11; 17:34. Although some examples seem quite interchangeable (e.g., Gen 37:2, 12), there may be a difference in construal in which רעה את involves a lighter touch, with the emphasis on feeding, while רעה ב, involves intentional and physical guiding (with the rod and staff; Ps 23:4). Alternatively, with אֵת and בְּ– alternation, full accusatives indicate higher transitivity, and thus fuller affectedness (Bekins 2014, 142), while בְּ– indicate lower affectedness, less likely to have undergone a change of state, which may be relevant if both "Jacob" and "Israel" were easily grafted into the Davidic kingship, rather than forcefully subdued (à la Ps 2). | |Text='''v. 71''' – The presence of בְּ with רעה "to shepherd" may highlight the physical contact of leading them (so Jenni 1992, 238). In this case, such a construal would be less prominent in constructions without the preposition (e.g., Gen 30:31, 36; 36:24; 37:12; Exod 3:1; 1 Sam 17:15; 25:6; 2 Sam 5:2; 7:7; Isa 61:5; Jer 3:15; 23:2). For other instances with בְּ, see Gen 37:2; 1 Sam 16:11; 17:34. Although some examples seem quite interchangeable (e.g., Gen 37:2, 12), there may be a difference in construal in which רעה את involves a lighter touch, with the emphasis on feeding, while רעה ב, involves intentional and physical guiding (with the rod and staff; Ps 23:4). Alternatively, with אֵת and בְּ– alternation, full accusatives indicate higher transitivity, and thus fuller affectedness (Bekins 2014, 142), while בְּ– indicate lower affectedness, less likely to have undergone a change of state, which may be relevant if both "Jacob" and "Israel" were easily grafted into the Davidic kingship, rather than forcefully subdued (à la Ps 2). | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 16:51, 23 April 2025
v. 71 – The presence of בְּ with רעה "to shepherd" may highlight the physical contact of leading them (so Jenni 1992, 238). In this case, such a construal would be less prominent in constructions without the preposition (e.g., Gen 30:31, 36; 36:24; 37:12; Exod 3:1; 1 Sam 17:15; 25:6; 2 Sam 5:2; 7:7; Isa 61:5; Jer 3:15; 23:2). For other instances with בְּ, see Gen 37:2; 1 Sam 16:11; 17:34. Although some examples seem quite interchangeable (e.g., Gen 37:2, 12), there may be a difference in construal in which רעה את involves a lighter touch, with the emphasis on feeding, while רעה ב, involves intentional and physical guiding (with the rod and staff; Ps 23:4). Alternatively, with אֵת and בְּ– alternation, full accusatives indicate higher transitivity, and thus fuller affectedness (Bekins 2014, 142), while בְּ– indicate lower affectedness, less likely to have undergone a change of state, which may be relevant if both "Jacob" and "Israel" were easily grafted into the Davidic kingship, rather than forcefully subdued (à la Ps 2).