John Zhu-En Wee, «Hebrew Syntax in the Organization of Laws and its Adaptation in the Septuagint», Vol. 85 (2004) 523-544
The Hebrew of the Pentateuch exhibits a hierarchy of
discourse markers that indicate different organization levels in the legal
texts. This organization elucidates the relationship (whether coordination or
subordination) of legal stipulations with each other. The markers studied
include X+yk+Pred and X+r#)+Pred
constructions, yk and M)
clauses, as well as a specialized use of the particle
hnh. The Greek translators may have been sensitive to the use of these
markers and even modified them in order to express their particular
interpretation of the text.
Hebrew Syntax in the Organization of Laws 543
the exception of v. 19, every verse in this passage begins with the
X+rça+Pred pattern. Within this section, the laws seem to be grouped
according to the description of their penalties: vv. 9-13.15-16 have the
inf. abs. of twm followed by the hop‘al impf. of the same verb, vv. 17-18
have the nip‘al of trk, while vv. 20-21 mention childlessness (µyryr[) as
the punishment. However, it is not clear if the death penalties described
by twm and trk differ at all in their forms. Furthermore, the laws here do
not seem to appear in logical order, unlike those of Leviticus 18, which
forbid incestuous relationships (18,6-16 // 20,11-12.17.19-21), sexual
relationships with in-laws (18,17-18 // 20,14), intercourse during
menstruation (18,19 // 20,18), adultery with neighbor’s wife (18,20 //
20,10), homosexuality (18,22 // 20,13), and intercourse with an animal
(18,23 // 20,15-16). Especially disorientating is the failure to group
together the laws against incest, even with their characteristic “uncover
the nakedness of ...†formula (Lev 20,11.17.19-21).
The translators, however, may have attempted to make some sense
out of the sequence of laws in Leviticus 20. Lev 20,11-12 contains two
out of the three rare instances where X+rça+Pred is translated as an
ejavn clause. This results in the organization of vv. 11-12 under v. 10:
X+rel+an+Pred (= X+rça+Pred): Laws against adultery (v. 10)
[
A
B................... ejavn clause (= X+rça+Pred): Relations with father’s wife (v. 11)
B’..................ejavn clause (= X+rça+Pred): Relations with son’s wife (v. 12)
Indeed, apart from vv. 11-12, only v. 21 explicitly states that the
family member involved in incest is also a spouse of someone else.
The LXX translation thus posits what is not clearly expressed in the
Hebrew, namely, that the offending party in verses 11 and 12 is guilty
on two accounts: incest and adultery.
*
**
The question of the translators’ intentionality has frequently been
discussed among scholars of the LXX. Aejmelaeus maintains that
“[the translators’] work is characterized by intuition and spontaneity
more than conscious deliberation and technique†(44). However, I have
argued that, in practice, “intentionality†and “deliberation†can
(44) AEJMELAEUS, “Translation Techniqueâ€, 25.