New Post
Search
Help[Facts] Re: Hebrew Phrase...? (yasha` na')
in reply to a message by Shai
Thanks for your response.
I see this positioning in JOHN, JOHANNAH, JONATHAN and ELIZABETH (to name a few).
Also, if the verb tense means "to save," wouldn't the addition of na' mean "to save, now" or "ready to save?"
"Like arrows in the hands of a warrior are sons born in one's youth." Ps. 127:4
JoHannah Jubilee, BenJudah Gabriel, Aaron Josiah, Jordan Uriah,
Maranatha Nissiah, (Anastasia Nike, 1992-1992), Jeshua David,
Shiloh Joshana, Elijah Daniel, Hezekiah Nathaniel, Zephaniah Joseph
I see this positioning in JOHN, JOHANNAH, JONATHAN and ELIZABETH (to name a few).
Also, if the verb tense means "to save," wouldn't the addition of na' mean "to save, now" or "ready to save?"
JoHannah Jubilee, BenJudah Gabriel, Aaron Josiah, Jordan Uriah,
Maranatha Nissiah, (Anastasia Nike, 1992-1992), Jeshua David,
Shiloh Joshana, Elijah Daniel, Hezekiah Nathaniel, Zephaniah Joseph
This message was edited 9/12/2015, 12:14 PM
1
Replies
“To save, now” - yes
“Ready to save” - not so much
With regard to having a name of G-d as a prefix, I think you’ll find that most instances will use “El” rather than “Yah/Y'” in that position, as in Elisheva, Elhanan, Elazar or Eliezer. These instances are very common and I should have pointed out “El” as a prominent exception earlier. Where the letter Yod (י) is used in the first position as a divine identifier, it will usually be coupled with “Vav/Vau” (וֹ) in the second position, as in Yochanan (יוֹחָנָן) or Yonatan (יוֹנָתָן).
How a name is spelled in English doesn’t necessarily impact its Hebrew meaning. It’s more about how you spell it in Hebrew.
“Ready to save” - not so much
With regard to having a name of G-d as a prefix, I think you’ll find that most instances will use “El” rather than “Yah/Y'” in that position, as in Elisheva, Elhanan, Elazar or Eliezer. These instances are very common and I should have pointed out “El” as a prominent exception earlier. Where the letter Yod (י) is used in the first position as a divine identifier, it will usually be coupled with “Vav/Vau” (וֹ) in the second position, as in Yochanan (יוֹחָנָן) or Yonatan (יוֹנָתָן).
How a name is spelled in English doesn’t necessarily impact its Hebrew meaning. It’s more about how you spell it in Hebrew.
1
Thanks again for your insight.
Her full name is SHILOH JOSHANA.
Would it be a stretch to interpret her name as, "The Peaceful One [is willing] to save, now?"
I realize that her first name is a Messianic reference, but I am using in the same context as with the name MICHAEL and her sister, MARANATHA.
Her full name is SHILOH JOSHANA.
Would it be a stretch to interpret her name as, "The Peaceful One [is willing] to save, now?"
I realize that her first name is a Messianic reference, but I am using in the same context as with the name MICHAEL and her sister, MARANATHA.
This message was edited 9/12/2015, 1:59 PM
1
Interesting conjunction of names and roots. In this combination, it could be taken to mean, “G-d returns in peace.”
Shiloh is the place where the Ark was located prior to being set up in Jerusalem for the first time. The name originally meant “peaceful place” but as a name (especially in conjunction with other words/names) it can contribute a general meaning of “peace” “peacefulness” or “tranquility”.
The word “shana” or “shanah” would normally be taken to mean “year” but it can also mean “to repeat” or even “to return” depending on the context. In this case, it is prefixed by “Jo” which can signify G-d when composed with “yod” and “vav”.
To obtain the aforementioned meaning, it should be pronounced “Shiloh Yoshana”.
Shiloh is the place where the Ark was located prior to being set up in Jerusalem for the first time. The name originally meant “peaceful place” but as a name (especially in conjunction with other words/names) it can contribute a general meaning of “peace” “peacefulness” or “tranquility”.
The word “shana” or “shanah” would normally be taken to mean “year” but it can also mean “to repeat” or even “to return” depending on the context. In this case, it is prefixed by “Jo” which can signify G-d when composed with “yod” and “vav”.
To obtain the aforementioned meaning, it should be pronounced “Shiloh Yoshana”.
1
That is how we pronounce it.
1
1. Your proposal hit a snag. In Malachi 3:6, G_d says, "For I am the L_RD [YHVH], I change [shanah] not;..."
2. Is it a stretch to translate it as "The Peace-Maker/Peaceable One* [is willing] to save, now?"
3. Looking again at na', it is also said to be used in the emphatic. In English, we use the word "do" as an emphatic for verbs. For instance, I could say,
"Speak up so I can hear you." Or I could say,
"Do speak up so I can hear you."
Does na' serve the same function? Could hosha na' be translated as "Do save [us]?"
*There also seems to be a strong tie-in to the phrase Prince of Peace [Sar Shalowm] found in Isaiah 9:6 (your namesake).
2. Is it a stretch to translate it as "The Peace-Maker/Peaceable One* [is willing] to save, now?"
3. Looking again at na', it is also said to be used in the emphatic. In English, we use the word "do" as an emphatic for verbs. For instance, I could say,
"Speak up so I can hear you." Or I could say,
"Do speak up so I can hear you."
Does na' serve the same function? Could hosha na' be translated as "Do save [us]?"
*There also seems to be a strong tie-in to the phrase Prince of Peace [Sar Shalowm] found in Isaiah 9:6 (your namesake).
This message was edited 9/13/2015, 12:19 AM
1
Technically, I think the passage reads “לאֹ שָׁנִיתִי” – perfect singular, but I see your point. Also, it’s not possible for G-d to actually return, for G-d is never away, i.e. G-d is omnipresent. In the Christian view, where G-d finds anthropomorphic expression in Jesus, however, it could still be a valid interpretation.
There is often a certain amount of reading between the lines when it comes to adapted names. It’s not an exact science.
Shanah can mean year, or cycle, or turn, or return, or change... with its best fit relying on the context in which it is found.
Though Shiloh is more descriptive of a place or a state of being than a person, I suppose that if one grants the concept of a personified form of G-d, then one could easily accommodate the personification of a place or state, especially in the same context.
In the Bible, the names of people are sometimes changed during the course of their experiences, as was the case with Joshua (Yehoshua), whose original name was Hosheah. That’s a relatively small change. More drastically, Jacob (Yaacov) was famously accorded the name Israel (Yisrael), which is a completely new name. Most of us don’t get to choose our own names, but we are often expected to live up to them nonetheless. Sometimes, we earn a name for ourselves and sometimes we bring honour or shame to a name we already possess.
In the end, how one conducts oneself is more important than what one is called, and very much more important than what one calls oneself.
There is often a certain amount of reading between the lines when it comes to adapted names. It’s not an exact science.
Shanah can mean year, or cycle, or turn, or return, or change... with its best fit relying on the context in which it is found.
Though Shiloh is more descriptive of a place or a state of being than a person, I suppose that if one grants the concept of a personified form of G-d, then one could easily accommodate the personification of a place or state, especially in the same context.
In the Bible, the names of people are sometimes changed during the course of their experiences, as was the case with Joshua (Yehoshua), whose original name was Hosheah. That’s a relatively small change. More drastically, Jacob (Yaacov) was famously accorded the name Israel (Yisrael), which is a completely new name. Most of us don’t get to choose our own names, but we are often expected to live up to them nonetheless. Sometimes, we earn a name for ourselves and sometimes we bring honour or shame to a name we already possess.
In the end, how one conducts oneself is more important than what one is called, and very much more important than what one calls oneself.
1
So, Jewish tradition doesn't consider the Shiloh of Genesis 49:10 to be the proper name of a prophesied person...?
Very true, but this site is devoted to name linguistics.
This message was edited 9/13/2015, 1:47 AM
1
I think it’s open to interpretation. Indeed, Shiloh is personified in several expositions of the text. I believe the confusion stems from the way in which the passage is constructed. In the following translation, the ambiguity becomes more apparent…
10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, as long as men come to Shiloh; and unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be.
Because the phrase “and unto him…” follows immediately after the name Shiloh, it’s natural for some to interpret the name as belonging to a person. The Christian belief system commonly views people as coming to Jesus, so this would naturally tend to reinforce that interpretation. On the other hand, the phrase “…as long as men come to Shiloh” leads one initially to think of the location known by that name – in which case, “him” would refer to Judah, the tribe that is the subject of this portion of the text.
Another way to look at the word in this context is that it may not relate to a proper name at all, whether that of a person or of a place, but that it speaks to a state of being related in some way to peace.
This is likely my last posting on this topic. I will not be able to access this site for a while.
Be well.
10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, as long as men come to Shiloh; and unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be.
Because the phrase “and unto him…” follows immediately after the name Shiloh, it’s natural for some to interpret the name as belonging to a person. The Christian belief system commonly views people as coming to Jesus, so this would naturally tend to reinforce that interpretation. On the other hand, the phrase “…as long as men come to Shiloh” leads one initially to think of the location known by that name – in which case, “him” would refer to Judah, the tribe that is the subject of this portion of the text.
Another way to look at the word in this context is that it may not relate to a proper name at all, whether that of a person or of a place, but that it speaks to a state of being related in some way to peace.
This is likely my last posting on this topic. I will not be able to access this site for a while.
Be well.
1
Again, thanks for your insight.
1