Daniella Ishai-Rosenboim, «Is yh MwOy (the Day of the Lord) a Term in Biblical Language?», Vol. 87 (2006) 395-401
The collocation yh MwOy in the Biblical language is not a term, as it does not answer
the criterion of being a term: one, specific and unchanged expression referring to
one, specific and unchanged concept: Rather, this collocation may be replaced by
other ones (e.g. yhl Mwy, yh P) Mwy, yhl Mq@n Mwy,
Kp)/wp) Mwy) and on the other hand the
concept is referred to also (mostly!) by another expression ( )whh Mwyh); nor does it
refer exclusively to the concept of ‘The Day of the Lord’. None of the cultures
continuing the Biblical one refer to the concept by this collocation or by a
translation of it.
Is ùh (the Day of the Lord) a Term in Biblical Language?
µ/y
Y. Hoffmann in his article “The Day of the Lord as a Concept and a Term in
the Prophetic Literature†demands that every discussion of this subject start
with “those passages that specifically use this phrase [i.e. ùh µ/y – ‘The Day of
the Lord’]†(1) rather than any other variation of it: wpa ˆwrj µwy(b) – ‘(On) the
Day of His fierce anger’, wpa µwy – ‘The Day of His anger’, ùh πa µwy – ‘The Day
of the Lord’s anger’, ùhl hswbmw hkwbmw hmwhm µwy – ‘The Lord’s Day of tumult,
confusion and trampling’, and µyhla ùhl awhh µwyhw – ‘That Day is the Lord’s’.
Hoffmann goes so far as to invalidate the conclusions of scholars who do not
base their researches on that point of departure. His demand stems from the
statement that the collocation ùh µ/y (The Day of the Lord, YHWH’s Day) is a
term in Biblical language. This article aims to examine this statement and
consequently the demand stemming from it. The examination will consider
both linguistic and philological aspects.
What is a term, and what are its characteristics? A term is one, specific
and unchanged expression referring to one, specific and unchanged concept.
The hearer, when he hears a term, thinks about one specific concept; on the
other side, the speaker, when he wants to refer to that specific concept, can
do it by that expression alone. The expression referring to that concept, at the
time of its birth, qualifies more or less its characteristics or its most
characteristic nature. Later, however, when it becomes a term, it is not
changed anymore; even if part of its characteristics undergo a transformation,
and even if it is the characteristic, that gave rise to the term that undergoes the
transformation, the term is fixed. As long as the concept (in any
transformation) is referred to by that specific expression, it is that specific
expression and only that specific expression, that refers to it — to say it in de
Saussure’s terminology: one specific and unchanged signifiant to one specific
and unchanged signifié.
Let us take for example the term ‘The Olympic Games’: when they took
place in ancient Greece, they were held in Olympia, and that place was their
prominent characteristic. Today they are held in different cities, but
nevertheless they cling obstinately to their name. On the other hand, other
games today, even if held in Olympia, are not Olympic games (2).
1. The meaning of the constructive ‘Day of the Lord’
The first task of this article is to understand the exact literal meaning of
the Hebrew collocation ùh µ/y (‘The Day of the Lord’). This collocation is a
(1) ZAW 93 (1981) 38: “It seems that any conclusion about the phrase ùh µ/y reached by
such a procedure is unreliable†(p. 38).
(2) Another example is ‘Secretary General’; The linguistically interesting aspect of this
term is that it deviates from the rules of the English grammar, nevertheless, as it is a term,
the wording of the collocation is kept with no change.