|
(Continued from page 103.)
Having Reference to the Employment of Anaesthetics
in Cases of Labour.
By the Rev. Abraham De Sola, Lecturer on Hebrew
Language and Literature, University of M’Gill
College.
In
making this assertion, we are aware that we may be
charged with jumping at a conclusion not at all
warranted, unless by the insufficient premises laid
down; since it may be objected, although Gesenius
may have meant by it “trouble,” which word he gives
as one of the significations of
עמל ngamal, “eager striving,” “giving
occasion for labour,” (some of the received meanings
of “trouble,”) still have many learned scholars,
both Christian and Jewish, frequently rendered
ngamal “sorrow,” as being the only applicable
sense in certain passages; and, moreover, even
Kimchi, himself, may have intended it to be
understood in this sense when he explained the root
עצב ngetseb by it.
To
this latter supposition, with which only we have now
to do, we reply, it is plainly impossible that
Kimchi, in using עמל ngamal as one of the significations of
עצב ngetseb, could have intended to convey
by it any other idea than that of labour, for these
reasons: First, Because of the eight, before
quoted, scriptural passages which he cites; three,
viz, Prov. xiv. 23; Isaiah lvii. 3; Prove. v. 13,
are rendered “labour,” in the authorized version.*
Here, then, we have the English translators of the
Bible, themselves, bearing testimony, indirect and
partial though it be, to the correctness of our
views as to Kimchi’s meaning.
But we may be reminded that Kimchi gives the word
יגיעה yegingha as well as
עמל ngamal, for the signification of
עצב ngetseb, and that he may have meant
יגיעה yegingha to be applied to the three
examples first referred to.
In
reply to this, we have to remark, Secondly,
<<195>>The eminent Hebrew grammarian, before citing
those instances in which he says,
עצב ngetseb means labour, expressly lays
down those passages in which he believes the word to
mean sorrow, anger, etc., the passages are, 1, Ps.
cxxxix. 24; 2, Prov. x. 22; 3, Prov. xv. 1; 4,
Isaiah I. 11; 5, Prov. x. 10; 6, Prov. xvi. 14; 7,
Job ix. 28; 8, Ps. cxlvii. 3; 9, Ps. iii. 4. Kimchi,
after quoting these nine texts, says,
הרוגז והדאגה ענין כולם i. e., “the meaning of ngetseb,
recurring in all these passages, is either anger or
sorrow” (harogez vehadahagah). On comparing
these nine examples with the eight before quoted,
and the remarks of Kimchi on each, we think it will
be readily admitted that if he had intended to teach
us that ngetseb, in the examples 1, 5, 6, 7,
8 of the first quoted series means “sorrow,” he
would, undoubtedly, have been careful to add them to
the nine lately quoted examples, wherein, as he
plainly tells us, ngetseb means sorrow or
anger.
Thirdly, We have to state the words of Kimchi
himself would be sufficient to show us what meaning
he attaches to ngamal. On the second of the
first quoted series of examples, viz., Prov. xiv.
23, “In all labour (ngetseb) there is
profit,” he says, “The meaning of this is, that from
all labour (ngamal) that a man does (sheyangamal
adam) he shall acquire profit and distinction;
for, through much labour (hengamal) he will
attain exaltation (hamangalah),* riches, and
dominion; but the labour (ngamal) of the lips
[pratling] and toil (veyegingath) of
[incessant] speaking, are but defects, and a falling
off from excellence; even as the Scripture addeth,
“but the talk of the lips tendeth only to penury.”
Be
it remarked, that the text upon which these
observations are made, is one wherein
עצב ngetseb is translated “labour,” by the
English and other translators, and Kimchi uses the
word עמל ngamal as an equivalent for, or
synonymous with עצב ngetseb.
Now let us read ngamal in the Rabbi’s
valuable comment, as signifying “sorrow,” and we
shall quickly be obliged to ask, Does sorrow indeed
procure to a man profit, distinction, etc.?—but let
us understand it as labour, and we shall soon see
the pertinence of Kimchi’s observations. Again, in
giving the meaning of ngamal,† he says the
meanings are יגיעה yegingha toil;
טורח torach great or troublesome labour;
and עול ngavel vanity—but he does not give an
equivalent for sorrow among the number. Be these
considerations sufficient to prove that, not
hastily, but with what we deem satisfactory grounds,
have we formed our con‑<<196>>clusion as to the
meaning of ngamal, one of the significations
of ngetseb as given in the “Sepher
Hashorashim.”
But the fact that Kimchi, profound grammarian though
he be, has derided the signification of
עצב ngetseb and
עצבון ngitsabbohn,
in Genesis iii. 16, to be “labour,” is not the only
reason, though it is one, why we cannot admit the
words to mean “sorrow.” We have other reasons, our
second we shall state thus: As “sorrow” is only the
secondary or figurative meaning of ngetseb,
its primary signification being “labour,” not
עצב ngetseb, but some other word,
expressive of no other idea but of sorrow or pain,
would have been here used, had it been the inspired
writer’s intention to convey “in sorrow thou
shalt bring forth,” etc.
Once more, we must recall to the reader’s attention
certain principles of Hebrew philology, in
elucidation and support of our position. It is a
peculiarity, more beautifully and more constantly
appertaining to the Hebrew language, that to avoid
the introduction of an infinite and useless number
of words, certain words possess, besides the
surprising variety of significations produced by
etymological changes, a secondary metaphorical
sense; thus we have ראש rosh the head, meaning a summit, a
chief, beginning, principal part of anything, etc.;
again, רגל regel, a foot; in the plural,
רגלים regalim times, cum multis aliis.
As examples of change of meaning in consequence of
etymological variations, we may instance
למד lammod, which expresses to learn, to
teach, to be taught, a teacher, a scholar, etc.,
etc. The following, which we select from many, and
which are, perhaps, the least pertinent among others
we might adduce, are examples showing how both cause
and effect may be expressed by modifications of the
same root:—
לשון lashon a tongue (cause), and 2, speech
(effect of using the tongue);
עשה ngasoh to do (cause),
מעשה mangaseh, a work, a thing done or made
(the effect of doing).
Of
the last class of examples do we consider ngetseb.
The original idea of the word we take to be labour
(cause), and its secondary, fatigue, exhaustion
(effects of labour on the human frame), and by
association, trouble, sorrow, pain, etc. We trust
the reader will join us in not considering this
notion either extravagant or far-fetched;—it may
possibly be not even original with us,—we will not
now stop to inquire; but, we repeat, labour must
necessarily be the primary meaning of ngetseb,
since there must be labour, bodily or mental, before
there can be fatigue, which is so closely allied, if
not synonymous with pain or sorrow.
(To be continued.) |
