Often, scholars debate whether to read the book of Ruth as a polemic against the disparagement of Moabites. Scholars who offer a non-polemical interpretation should provide an alternative explanation for Ruth’s Moabite identity as B. Porten does in a very brief article from 1976. The present article provides further support for Porten’s argument by drawing attention to a possible pun, noted by T. Linafelt, on the word blṭ in Ruth 3:7.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
B. Porten, “Structure, Style, and Theme of the Scroll of Ruth”, Association for Jewish Studies Newsletter 17 (1976), pp. 15-16; J. Schipper, Ruth: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (ayb 7D; New Haven, 2016), pp. 38-44.
Schipper, Ruth, p. 41. For other verbal correspondences, consult T. Linafelt, Ruth (Berit Olam; Collegeville, mn, 1999), p. 52.
Porten, “Structure, Style, and Theme of the Scroll of Ruth”, p. 16; cf. Gen Rab. 41:10; H. Fisch, “Ruth and the Structure of Covenant History”, vt 32 (1982), pp. 425-37.
Garsiel, Biblical Names, p. 252; B. Porten, “The Scroll of Ruth: A Rhetorical Study”, Gratz College Annual of Jewish Studies 7 (1978), pp. 23-49, here p. 46; J. M. Sasson, Ruth: A New Translation with a Philological Commentary and a Formalist-Folklorist Interpretation (2nd ed.; Sheffield, 1999), p. 19; Schipper, Ruth, p. 9.
Garsiel, Biblical Names, p. 252. I note another consonantal anagram involving the term “I would uncover” (’glh) in 4:4 and the term “the kindred redeemer” (hg’l) in 4:1, 6, 8 (Schipper, Ruth, pp. 8, 164).
Schipper, Ruth, pp. 168, 177. I also note that the legal terminology in Ruth 4 rarely clarifies the legal transactions that it describes. Rather, it creates rhymes, puns, assonance and alliteration (Ruth, pp. 9, 164, 168, 177).
Linafelt, Ruth, p. 52; cf. LaCocque, Ruth, p. 95. I would like to thank B. Porten for reminding me of this pun in a private conversation at the 2015 Annual International Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 337 | 78 | 9 |
Full Text Views | 297 | 8 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 198 | 15 | 0 |
Often, scholars debate whether to read the book of Ruth as a polemic against the disparagement of Moabites. Scholars who offer a non-polemical interpretation should provide an alternative explanation for Ruth’s Moabite identity as B. Porten does in a very brief article from 1976. The present article provides further support for Porten’s argument by drawing attention to a possible pun, noted by T. Linafelt, on the word blṭ in Ruth 3:7.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 337 | 78 | 9 |
Full Text Views | 297 | 8 | 2 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 198 | 15 | 0 |