04-30-2008, 04:11 PM
Hi Jerzy,
Technically the translation should be "firstborn son", as "Bukhra" (firstborn) is an adjective. Etheridge seemed overly influenced by the word order in the Aramaic which is "her son, the firstborn". However in Aramaic an adjective always follows the noun it references, so there should be no comma there....just "firstborn son."
The title "Bukhra", by the way, does not necessarily mean there were more sons. Even today in only-child families, the single child is still referred to as the "bukhra". (blessed)
+Shamasha Paul
Technically the translation should be "firstborn son", as "Bukhra" (firstborn) is an adjective. Etheridge seemed overly influenced by the word order in the Aramaic which is "her son, the firstborn". However in Aramaic an adjective always follows the noun it references, so there should be no comma there....just "firstborn son."
The title "Bukhra", by the way, does not necessarily mean there were more sons. Even today in only-child families, the single child is still referred to as the "bukhra". (blessed)
+Shamasha Paul