Abstract
Abstract In recent literature, the noun ܫܡܝܐ has been described as a singular in the book of Isaiah, ostensibly on the basis of the lack of syame. I will argue to the contrary, demonstrating that it should be described as a plural in this corpus. The key to proper interpretation of the form is agreement with other clausal and phrasal constituents, not the presence or absence of syame.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
