On the noun אִישׁ in Genesis 4:23

(The above rendering comes from the RJPS translation, an adaptation of the NJPS translation. Before accounting for this rendering, I will analyze the plain sense of the Hebrew term containing אִישׁ, by employing a situation-oriented construal as outlined in this introduction, pp. 11–16.)

Whenever a speaker is sketching a situation (as here), אִישׁ is the default label to introduce an essential participant into the audience’s mental picture of that situation. Here, that referent is definitive, as a party to the depicted altercation. Indeed, the situation is framed in terms of him as a participant: the syntax makes the designation a pointed one, by fronting the grammatical object (אִישׁ) before the verb. This usage of אִישׁ is prototypical, for it evokes the situation of interest. Thus it is playing one of its classic discourse roles.

One might imagine that the parallelism with יֶלֶד (NJPS: ‘lad’) suggests a more age-oriented, semantically contentful noun usage for אִישׁ. However, in this boasting context—judging from the poetic form, which implies emotionality—יֶלֶד is probably intended to disparage the victim (akin to “I faced off with a mere kid”) rather than to report his actual age. (For יֶלֶד as describing a relatively inexperienced and incompetent individual, see 1 Kgs. 12:8 and esp. Dan. 1:4.)

As for rendering into English, the NJPS ‘man’ no longer functions as a situating noun in such a context; rather, it is taken as profiling an adult male as such. That construal, in turn, creates dissonance when paired with ‘lad’, which invites the incorrect inference that Lamech is referring to two different victims.

With the loss in English of a suitable situating noun for this context, a role noun is likely to be the closest equivalent. Indeed, in many of its biblical usages, אִישׁ has long been represented in English by relational (role) terms such as husband and wife. Relational nouns are often the closest English equivalent to a situating function, because they position the referent within a larger context (as opposed to sortal nouns, which regard their referents in terms of intrinsic attributes). This near-equivalence works up to a point. Ultimately, given the fact that situating nouns operate on the discourse level of communication, whereas relational nouns operate on the informational level, the two types have a somewhat different cognitive and communicative impact. Typically, a situating noun is more efficient, being processed more quickly by the mind.

In this verse, among the possible role nouns, ‘rival’ comes closest to evoking the depicted situation—and thus best reflects the discourse function of אִישׁ.