Continuing
from the previous post regarding the difficulty with the English in Joseph
Smith’s translation, but how, unbeknownst to most, excels in Hebrew. Also
continuing with the use of the word “and…”
Still
another unusual construction using "and" is the Hebrew use of
"and also." In this case, English also uses "and" but
Hebrew must add "also." In Hebrew this construct, "and
also," is used to denote a strong link between two things. Again, this
structure is common throughout the Book of Mormon (it occurs 447 times). For
example, in 1 Nephi 8:3 "and also" appears twice:
"And behold, because of the thing which I
have seen, I have reason to rejoice in the Lord because of Nephi and also of
Sam; for I have reason to suppose that they, and also many of their seed, will
be saved."
It
might be said, here, then, that Mark Twain’s complaint about using “and it came
to pass” should be taken up with the Hebrew language and not with the Book of
Mormon.
Take,
for instance, the “If…and,” which is yet another place where the Hebrew
"and" shows up in a strange place. The Hebraic equivalent of the
English "if-then" clause is the Hebrew "if-and" clause. This is not found in the
current editions of the Book of Mormon, nor is it found anywhere in the English
Old Testament. But, it was in the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon. For
example, this is how Helaman 12:13-21 appeared in that edition:
"…yea, and if he sayeth unto the earth Move
and it is moved; yea, and if he sayeth unto the earth, Thou shalt go back, that
it lengthen out the day for many hours, and it is done;…And behold, also, if he
sayeth unto the waters of the great deep, Be thou dried up, and it is done.
Behold, if he sayeth unto this mountain, Be thou raised up, and come over and
fall upon that city, that it be buried up and behold it is done…and if the Lord
shall say, Be thou accursed, that no man shall find thee from this time
henceforth and forever, and behold, no man getteth it henceforth and forever.
And behold, if the Lord shall say unto a man, Because of thine iniquities thou
shalt be accursed forever, and it shall be done. And if the Lord shall say,
Because of thine iniquities thou shalt be cut off from my presence, and he will
cause that it shall be so."
[NOTE: Before going on, for
those who have been trying to make a point out of how the Lord keeps things
hidden, we should always keep in mind that the Lord commands and all the elements
obey. If he wants something moved, it moves when he commands it, if he wants
something unseen or unknown, his command ensures that, also. The idea of the
Great Lakes Theorist claiming the Land of Promise had to be away, “hidden” from
passers-by along the coasts of the New World” is utter nonsense. If the Lord
does not want it found, he gives the command and it is not found—that is what
this statement above in Helaman tells us]
Now another part of the Hebrew grammar is the
parenthetical insert, which though used extensively in English, is never used
in Hebrew—which instead uses the “and” character to set off what in English would be a parenthetical phrase or
comment. In the English Old Testament, the translation has regularly expressed
this using the normal English practice of parentheses and commas (leaving the
"and" character untranslated). But, the Book of Mormon, particularly the 1830
edition, used the Hebraic form, usually introducing a parenthetical statement
with a now, and ending with and.
For example, we read in 3 Nephi 12:1, "When
Jesus had spoken these words unto Nephi, and to those who had been called, (now…the
number of them who had been called, and received power and authority to
baptize, was twelve) and…behold, he stretched forth his hand" (keep in mind
that the punctuation was inserted by the printer).
An example of the "and…and" construction is found in
the 1830 edition of 1 Nephi 10:17, which reads, "…which power was received
by faith in the Son of God and…the Son of God was the Messiah who should come
and it came to pass…" This is certainly not good English, but it is very good
Hebrew.
Also
in Hebrew, the relative pronoun ’ašêr,
(used to connect a clause or phrase to a noun or pronoun) and is typically
translated as “who, whom, which, whoever, whomever, whichever, and that,” used,
by the way, over 5,500 times in the Bible, and was used in place references in
the Book of Mormon and has been the most common correction to the 1830 edition.
As an example, in the Book of Mormon ’ašêr
was most often translated as “which,”
but that was later changed in 891 times to the word “who,” and 66 times to the
word “whom.” While “which” was the correct Hebrew translation, it was not the
best English translation. As an example, in Alma 46:34, in the 1830 edition
read, "Now, Moroni being a man which
was appointed by the chief judges…" now reads more accurately in
English as "Now, Moroni being a man
who was appointed by the chief judges…"
Another example is the use of the word “that,”
where in Hebrew subordinate clauses begin with a preposition plus a word that
translates into “that” in English. This results in such redundant English
phrases as:
•
"And because that they are redeemed from the fall" (2 Nephi 2:26)
•
"because that my heart is broken" (2 Nephi 4:32)
Generally
such redundant phrases are eliminated in translation when the translator
understands the grammar of both languages, the one being translated, and the
one it is being translated into. In the case of Joseph Smith, he would have
known very little if anything of Hebrew grammar, and not much more of English
grammar, which arguably was not even understood by most American English
speaking people of the time.
Still another area of difference is that Hebrew, unlike English,
has very few adverbs, thus the translation, especially the 1830 edition, has
numerous prepositional phrases and few adverbs, as one would expect if they
keep in mind that it is a translation of Hebrew-thinking and Hebrew-speaking
people and not English-speaking people.
Examples would be: “with all diligence” instead of
“diligently;” “with much slaughter” instead of “slaughtered;” "in
righteousness" instead of "righteously;" "in haste” instead
of “hastily;” "of faith" instead of "faithfully;" and "of
a surety" instead of "surely."
And
also using prepositional phrases instead of adverbially, like in the use of the
Hebrew “harebeh.” John Tvedtnes makes this further observation about Hebrew
adverbs: "At least one adjective (harebeh, 'many, exceeding') is used
adverbially, but more often a prepositional phrase is used. The Book of Mormon
is replete with adverbial usage of the adjective 'exceeding' (as in 'exceeding
great joy'--instead of 'exceedingly'--in 1 Nephi 8:12)."
There
is also the Hebraic involving the construct state, or status
constructus, which is a noun-form occurring in Asiatic languages, and
particularly common in Semitic lanauges (Hebrew as well as Arabic and Syriac).
In
the Hebrew nouns are placed in the construct state when they are modified by
another noun in a genitive construction, i.e., a type of grammatical
construction used to express a relation between two nouns, such as “Laban’s
sword” (the “head noun” is "Laban," the dependent noun is "sword"), and in English,
the head noun is given first, whereas in Hebrew, it follows the dependent noun,
as in “the Sword of Laban.” This is seen in 1 Nephi 3:1, where Nephi writes
that he “returned from speaking with the Lord, to the tent of my father.” In
English, we would place the head noun (father) first, and the dependent noun
(tent) following or last, i.e., "to my father's tent."
Thus
we see in Hebrew the odd-sounding “skin of blackness,” “state of happiness,”
“wrath of God,” “plates of brass,” "Sword of Laban,” and “words of plainness,”
instead of the more proper sounding in English: “black skin,” “happy state,”
“God’s wrath,” “brass plates,” “Laban’s sword,” and “plain words.” This is
simply another Hebraism that shows the authenticity of the Book of Mormon since
in Hebrew prepositions are commonly used to produce adverbs such as “with joy”
instead of “joyfully.”
All
of these are merely additional examples of the authenticity of the Book of
Mormon that obviously bear out that the book is exactly what Joseph Smith
claimed it to be—a translation of an ancient record of a Hebrew people.
(See
the next post, “It’s Very Good Hebrew – Part III,” for more on how the Book of
Mormon fails in English but excels in Hebrew.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment