New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesNew input to the discussion of the name RUTH
The interpretation of RUTH given on this site: “friend(ship)” does not seem up-to-date.
150 years ago the German scholar Wilhelm Gesenius took up this translation into his Thesaurus linguae Hebraicae, and it has been copied since.
But in 1928 Martin Noth (Die israelitischen Personennamen im Rahmen der gemeinsemitischen Namengebung) stated (quoting a guy called Nöldecke), that this was impossible, as it contradicts Semitic laws of sound development. Gesenius’ theory assumes that the ayin of “re’ut” (here represented by the apostrophe) has been omitted in the contraction to “rut”. The ayin however is a very stable and resistant sound and character. I don’t think any scholar sticks to the “friend(ship)”- theory today.
In 1966 Hans Bruppacher published his article “Die Bedeutung des Namens Ruth” in “Theologische Zeitschrift“ 22, pp. 12-18. He again rejects the re’ut (resh-ayin-tav) – rut theory and favours a different interpretation: “saturation, refreshment”, which is “revut” in Hebrew. He points out, that this could easily be contracted to “rut”, the consonantic vav (waw) turning vocalic.
Bruppacher also refers to a third derivation of the name: from “ra’ah” (look). “Re’ut” (resh-aleph-tav) would mean (the act of) “looking”. He can’t see much sense in this, but he neglects one possible interpretation, that seems rather likely to me: “(God) has looked upon (the mother in a friendly way)” and thus given a child to her.
Too much conjection? Take Yiskah (which probably was turned into Jessica by Shakespeare): This means “he (God) beholds” and is generally interpreted in the same way. (No Yahwe in this name, not explicidly!)
I believe, this is worth thinking about. So is the “refreshment”. But forget the “friend”! (By the way, the rabbinical tradition doesn’t mention it.)
150 years ago the German scholar Wilhelm Gesenius took up this translation into his Thesaurus linguae Hebraicae, and it has been copied since.
But in 1928 Martin Noth (Die israelitischen Personennamen im Rahmen der gemeinsemitischen Namengebung) stated (quoting a guy called Nöldecke), that this was impossible, as it contradicts Semitic laws of sound development. Gesenius’ theory assumes that the ayin of “re’ut” (here represented by the apostrophe) has been omitted in the contraction to “rut”. The ayin however is a very stable and resistant sound and character. I don’t think any scholar sticks to the “friend(ship)”- theory today.
In 1966 Hans Bruppacher published his article “Die Bedeutung des Namens Ruth” in “Theologische Zeitschrift“ 22, pp. 12-18. He again rejects the re’ut (resh-ayin-tav) – rut theory and favours a different interpretation: “saturation, refreshment”, which is “revut” in Hebrew. He points out, that this could easily be contracted to “rut”, the consonantic vav (waw) turning vocalic.
Bruppacher also refers to a third derivation of the name: from “ra’ah” (look). “Re’ut” (resh-aleph-tav) would mean (the act of) “looking”. He can’t see much sense in this, but he neglects one possible interpretation, that seems rather likely to me: “(God) has looked upon (the mother in a friendly way)” and thus given a child to her.
Too much conjection? Take Yiskah (which probably was turned into Jessica by Shakespeare): This means “he (God) beholds” and is generally interpreted in the same way. (No Yahwe in this name, not explicidly!)
I believe, this is worth thinking about. So is the “refreshment”. But forget the “friend”! (By the way, the rabbinical tradition doesn’t mention it.)
1