02_Burnight-co_347_370 28/10/14 10:35 Pagina 350 350 JOHN BURNIGHT rather than irritation or impatience 6, while the Targum and Peshiṭta simply utilize the Aramaic and Syriac cognates in their translations, yhltXt (“be tired”) and (“wearied by labor”) 7. Further, as a number of scholars have pointed out, the interrogative h] modifies the verb to which it is attached, hsn, rather than halt. The transla- tors of the Septuagint and Targum recognized this: though they ren- der the verse quite differently, neither presents halt as the focus of Eliphaz’s question. The verb describing Job’s distress is thus bet- ter read as an acknowledgement of Job’s current condition, rather than what may happen if Eliphaz speaks. If halt is therefore read as “you are weary”, “you are ex- hausted” or similarly, then Eliphaz’s first words create a strong dis- tant semantic parallelism with 3,26, where Job laments his inability to find “ease” or “rest” 8. The perception of parallelism is further strengthened by Eliphaz’s use of rbd (“word”) and !ylm (“words”) in 4,2, given that Job also complains of his lack of jqv (“quiet”) in 3,26. The sense of 4,2a would then be “May one try a word with you, since you are so exhausted?” 9 This sharp tone matches that of the next colon: “But who can hold back words?” When viewed in this way, Eliphaz’s first words are in fact an intertextual “response” to Job’s last: he is not expressing his concern that he might “offend” Job, but rather asserting that he is compelled to speak despite Job’s previous complaint that he has no “ease”, “silence”, or “rest”. These are not the words of a comforting friend, but rather one who is in- dignant at what he has heard and feels compelled to answer. 6 Mikra’ot Gedolot Sefer Iyov (Jerusalem 1998) 13-14. 7 CLINES (Job 1–20, 108) writes that hal indicates a lack of ability, and so is the opposite of lky in the next colon. Also see C.L. SEOW, Job 1–21. In- terpretation and Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI 2013) 392. I concur with this reading of the sense, but given the usage elsewhere within the Bible and without (see n. 5 above), this inability is in my view best read as being due to exhaustion or weariness, not a lack of capability. 8 “Distant” semantic parallelism, using the nomenclature of the system of analysis designed by Dennis Pardee, refers to parallel elements separated from each other by at least one other poetic unit; see D. PARDEE, Ugaritic and Hebrew Poetic Parallelism. A Trial Cut (‘nt I and Proverbs 2) (Leiden – New York 1988) 187-191. In this case, the verses are separated only by the intro- ductory formula in 4,1. 9 Cf. DHORME, Le livre de Job, 38.