King James translation of that part: "That which groweth of its own accord of thy harvest thou shalt not reap", vs another translation "Do not harvest crops that grow on their own" (cite). So the King James English is more of a tongue-twister than the other, but the translation doesn't suck.
Oh, it's worth noting that in terms of word/phrase order, King James actually matches the Hebrew better -- but that's because Hebrew sometimes (often?) puts the object before the verb and (otherwise) almost always puts the verb before the both the subject and object. It's not cumbersome in Hebrew the way it often is in English translation.
So, for example, the frequent phrase "And God spoke to Moses" is ordered, in Hebrew, "and spoke God to Moses". The verb (conjugation? declension? don't know the correct term) tells you up front that the subject is going to be (e.g.) singular male.
From a (Hebrew) verb, without the rest of the sentence, you can learn the following things: tense, gender of subject, number of subject, and "binyan" (causitive vs declarative vs 5 other options I can't name right now). I'm assuming that it's correct to refer to at least the first three of these as coming from the "conjugation"; is that right?
Pity I never took an intro-level inguistics course. There are concepts that, it seems, most languages other than English have, that we never really see. For example, the past-tense form of an English verb never varies based on number or gender; that only happens in present tense, and then it's just that third-person singular is different from everything else.
Yeah, English with is two or three verb tenses and two conjugations is kinda bowled over by the romance languages with their six to nine of each. Thou couldst always attempt ressurrection of the previously dropped English conjugations. :)
Translation: Everett Fox, in The Schocken Bible, Volume I: The Five Books of Moses (ISBN 0-8052-1119-5)
(please excuse poor scholarly format for the citations in this comment)
the aftergrowth of your harvest you are not to harvest, the grapes of your consecrated-vines you are not to amass; a Sabbath of Sabbath-ceasing shall there be for the land!
[Note: the "the" above is purposely lower case, as Fox has this as a continuation of the sentance in verse 4.]
The "Old" JPS Translation, as found in SS&R. Publishing Company's Linear Translation of Rashi's commentary (they might have changed the translation to match with the Rashi):
That which groweth of itself of thy harvest thou shalt not reap, and the grapes of thy undressed vine thou shalt not gather; a year of solemn rest shall it be for the land.
The "New" JPS Translation, from Etz Hayim, ISBN 0-8276-0712-1:
You shall not reap the aftergrowth of your harvest or gather the grapes of your untrimmed vines; it shall be a year of complete rest for the land.
I'm ashamed to say that I don't have any other translations at hand...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
And by the mercy of the divinity(ies), neither did King James, or it would be a badly-translated tongue twister to boot. ;)
no subject
no subject
So, for example, the frequent phrase "And God spoke to Moses" is ordered, in Hebrew, "and spoke God to Moses". The verb (conjugation? declension? don't know the correct term) tells you up front that the subject is going to be (e.g.) singular male.
no subject
(Verbs take "conjugations"; nouns take "declensions"; both are examples of "inflections".)
no subject
From a (Hebrew) verb, without the rest of the sentence, you can learn the following things: tense, gender of subject, number of subject, and "binyan" (causitive vs declarative vs 5 other options I can't name right now). I'm assuming that it's correct to refer to at least the first three of these as coming from the "conjugation"; is that right?
Pity I never took an intro-level inguistics course. There are concepts that, it seems, most languages other than English have, that we never really see. For example, the past-tense form of an English verb never varies based on number or gender; that only happens in present tense, and then it's just that third-person singular is different from everything else.
no subject
no subject
Thou couldst always attempt ressurrection of the previously dropped English conjugations. :)
which verse?
Re: which verse?
Re: which verse?
(please excuse poor scholarly format for the citations in this comment)
[Note: the "the" above is purposely lower case, as Fox has this as a continuation of the sentance in verse 4.]
The "Old" JPS Translation, as found in SS&R. Publishing Company's Linear Translation of Rashi's commentary (they might have changed the translation to match with the Rashi):
The "New" JPS Translation, from Etz Hayim, ISBN 0-8276-0712-1:
I'm ashamed to say that I don't have any other translations at hand...