. . . into a woman] So in the Egyptian "Tale of the two brothers," the god Chnum 'built' a wife for his favourite Batau, the hieroglyphic determinative showing that the operation was actually likened to the building of a wall (see Wiedemann, DB, Sup. 180).—23. By a flash of intuition the man divines that the fair creature now brought to him is part of himself, and names her accordingly. There is a poetic ring and rhythm in the exclamation that breaks from him.—This at last] Lit. 'This, this time' (v.i.): note the thrice repeated (Hebrew characters).—bone of my bones, etc.] The expressions originate in the primitive notion of kinship as resting on "participation in a common mass of flesh, blood, and bones" (Rob. Sm. RS2, 273 f.: cf. KM2, 175 f.), so that all the members of a kindred group are parts of the same substance, whether acquired by heredity or assimilated in the processes of nourishment (cf. 2914 3727, Ju. 92, 2 Sa. 51 1913). The case before us, where the material identity is expressed in the manner of woman's creation, is unique.—shall be called Woman] English is fortunate in being able to reproduce this assonance ('Κ, 'Iššā) without straining language: other translations are driven to tours de force
Duhm's view that hypnotic sleep is indicated. It is true that in the
vb. (Niph.) that sense is less marked.—23. (Hebrew characters)] The construction
rendered above takes (
Hebrew characters) as subj. of the sent. and (
Hebrew characters) = 'this time,' the
art. having full demonstrative force, as in 2934f. 3020 4630, Ex. 927 (so GΣΘV;
De. Di. Gu. al.). The accents, however, unite the words
in one phrase 'this time,' after the rather important analogy of (
Hebrew characters)
(2736 4310), leaving the subj. unexpressed. This sense is followed by
STOJ, and advocated by Sta. (ZATW, xvii. 210 ff.); but it seems less
acceptable than the other.—(
Hebrew characters), (
Hebrew characters)] The old derivation of these words
from a common [root] (
Hebrew characters) is generally abandoned, (
Hebrew characters) being assigned to a
hypothetical [root] (
Hebrew characters) = 'be strong' (Ges. Th.). Ar. and Aram., indeed,
show quite clearly that the [root] seen in the pl. (
Hebrew characters) (and in (
Hebrew characters)) and
that of (
Hebrew characters) ((
Hebrew characters)) are only apparently identical, the one having s where
the other has [t=]. The masc. and fem. are therefore etymologically
distinct, and nothing remains but a very strong assonance. The
question whether we are to postulate a third [root] for the sing. (
Hebrew characters) does
not greatly concern us here; the arguments will be found in BDB, s.v.
See Nö. ZDMG, xl. 740 ("Aber (
Hebrew characters) möchte ich doch bei (
Hebrew characters) lassen").
In imitation of the assonance, Σ. has ἄνδρις, V Virago. Θ. λἥψις, represents
(
Hebrew characters), 'I will take': a curious blunder which is fully elucidated by