Persian Rule and Yehud, 539-515: Critical Issues

The Masoretic Text of Haggai 2.7b in light of verbal valency patterns

“…The same is true of the observation that ‘the sg. may carry a collective sense (Gesenius, 2006: 463).’ Kessler, 2002: 160n11. For a collective reading to be compelling, the relevant data (which are lacking) are examples where חמדה‎ in particular (a) unambiguously has a collective sense and (b) takes a plural verb when used collectively.…”

“…See n. 9 below; Rabbinic Midrash , e.g., Midrash Tanhuma Shemot 29:1; Mishrash Shemot Rabbah 3:8; Midrash Tanhuma Buber Shemot 26:1. Accessed at https://www.sefaria.org/texts/Midrash; Keil and Delitzsch, 1978: 193–94; Smith, 1984: 156; Petersen, 1984: 67–68; Verhoef, 1987: 92n12; Reventlow, 1993: 22; Kessler, 2002: 160n11; Boda, 2004: 126n22; Assis, 2008: 585; Hallaschka, 2011: 60–61; Petterson, 2015: 66; Rogland, 2016: 41; Koopmans, 2017: 183; Leuenberger, 2020: 229; ASV; RSV; JPS; ESV; NIV; HCSB. Commenting on the history of the major English translations, Wolf points out that, ‘beginning with the 1901 ASV, which rendered “desire” as “precious things”, the major translations abandoned the personal “desire” of the KJV for an impersonal idea [i.e., treasures, precious things, etc.]’.…”