Elaborating מעמר's theory of נסיב vs. דבר

Summary: Much as I intuited. Baruch Shekivanti! Basically, directing vs. every other usage.

Post: In a prior post on Bamidbar, I presented theories of where Onkelos uses  נסיב vs. דבר, to translate לקח. And people argue on Maamar's theory, and on his data. It turns out that my own intuited theory, which I suggested might be the same as his, was indeed more or less so.

Thanks to Mississippi Fred MacDowell, we can see that Maamer says:

"Targum Onkelos is ודבר, and in precise texts is written ונסיב. And the Meturgeman {=R' Eliyahu Bachur} misled the copyists to correct to ודבר, with what he said in the root דבר and in the root נסב: 'all language of taking which applies to man is translated with the word דבר, such as {Bereishit 2:15}

15. Now the Lord God took the man, and He placed him in the Garden of Eden to work it and to guard it.

טו. וַיִּקַּח יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֱ־לֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם וַיַּנִּחֵהוּ בְגַן עֵדֶן לְעָבְדָהּ וּלְשָׁמְרָהּ:

as well as {Bereishit 12:15}:

15. And Pharaoh's princes saw her, and they praised her to Pharaoh, and the woman was taken to the house of Pharaoh.

טו. וַיִּרְאוּ אֹתָהּ שָׂרֵי פַרְעֹה וַיְהַלְלוּ אֹתָהּ אֶל פַּרְעֹה וַתֻּקַּח הָאִשָּׁה בֵּית פַּרְעֹה:

as well as {Yehoshua 2:4}:

ד  וַתִּקַּח הָאִשָּׁה אֶת-שְׁנֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים, וַתִּצְפְּנוֹ; וַתֹּאמֶר כֵּן, בָּאוּ אֵלַי הָאֲנָשִׁים, וְלֹא יָדַעְתִּי, מֵאַיִן הֵמָּה.

4 And the woman took the two men, and hid them; and she said: 'Yea, the men came unto me, but I knew not whence they were;

End quote {from the Meturgeman}.


Behold, all the proofs that he brings are a matter of conveyance {נהיגה}, like the language of DABBAR in Aramaic, and just as the context which follows in each instance testifies -- by Adam, it states וַיַּנִּחֵהוּ בְגַן עֵדֶן; that he placed him in the Garden of Eden; and by Sarah, she was brought to the house of Pharaoh; and Rachav brought them up to the roof and his them there. And like them Onkelos translates {in parshat Balak, in Bemidbar 23:28, and 24:31}

28. So Balak took Balaam ...

כח. וַיִּקַּח בָּלָק אֶת בִּלְעָם ...

as {see here}:

כג,כח וַיִּקַּח בָּלָק, אֶת-בִּלְעָם, רֹאשׁ הַפְּעוֹר, הַנִּשְׁקָף עַל-פְּנֵי הַיְשִׁימֹן.

וּדְבַר בָּלָק, יָת בִּלְעָם, רֵישׁ רָמְתָא, דְּמִסְתַּכְיָא עַל אַפֵּי בֵּית יְשִׁימוֹן.

because after these mentions come the place the which he brought him. And also if the place is not mentioned, it is understood from the topic, such as (Bereishit 17:23):

23. And Abraham took Ishmael his son and all those born in his house and all those purchased with his money, every male of the people of Abraham's household, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskin on that very day, as God had spoken with him.

כג. וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָהָם אֶת יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ וְאֵת כָּל יְלִידֵי בֵיתוֹ וְאֵת כָּל מִקְנַת כַּסְפּוֹ כָּל זָכָר בְּאַנְשֵׁי בֵּית אַבְרָהָם וַיָּמָל אֶת בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתָם בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אִתּוֹ אֱ־לֹהִים:

that he took them to circumcise them. However, any language of taking where the topic does not inform on conveyance from one place to another, it is necessary to say in the Targum the language of נסיבא, and so any taking of a woman {as a wife} is translated as such. [The words of the printer.]"

This was much as I expected, and indeed suggested myself. I have a lot more to say about this, but I don't have time to develop it on erev Shabbos. So perhaps a follow-up post or three later, with pictures and analysis. For now, I will just note that this is the very first comment on sefer Bamidbar, and that it explicitly attributes it to דברי המספיס, the words of the printer.

And so, I don't know that this is something we can necessary blame, or credit,  Maamar, that is, R' Moshe Segal Landau and R' Wolf Meir. Who is the printer here?