Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/171

  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 .—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. RS$2$, 273 f.: cf. KM$2$, 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. 29$14$ 37$27$, Ju. 9$2$, 2 Sa. 5$1$ 19$13$). 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 (Îš, 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. ] The construction rendered above takes as subj. of the sent. and = 'this time,' the art. having full demonstrative force, as in 29$34f.$ 30$20$ 46$30$, Ex. 9$27$ (so G ΣΘV; De. Di. Gu. al.). The accents, however, unite the words in one phrase 'this time,' after the rather important analogy of (27$36$ 43$10$), leaving the subj. unexpressed. This sense is followed by ST$OJ$, and advocated by Sta. (ZATW, xvii. 210 ff.); but it seems less acceptable than the other.—, ] The old derivation of these words from a common [root] is generally abandoned,  being assigned to a hypothetical [root]  = 'be strong' (Ges. Th.). Ar. and Aram., indeed, show quite clearly that the [root] seen in the pl. (and in ) and that of  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. does not greatly concern us here; the arguments will be found in BDB, s.v. See Nö. ZDMG, xl. 740 ("Aber möchte ich doch bei  lassen"). In imitation of the assonance, Σ. has, V Virago. Θ., represents , 'I will take': a curious blunder which is fully elucidated by