@Davïd Thanks. TaggedTanakh.org is definitely wrong then.

@ScottS Yup yup.

@ScottS Too many comments/questions for comments.....

I'm having a hard time seeing how "recall" got into the translation. Without that, the clause is reduced to the noun "Bethel" (+ modifiers, which I don't think anyone is arguing go with anything other than Bethel -- agreed, a place!), and we're still left with it up next to האל.

I would have called אשר a relative (rather than resumptive) pronoun and שם a resumptive adverb (rather than pronoun) -- maybe just different terminology. But noun + relative clause = noun, which has to be dealt with in the larger syntax, which is the issue.

If the nominative absolute proposed is "Bethel", is it a problem that your translation has it as a direct object? The head of a relative clause IMO...

Re. the above, I have a feeling you didn't intend "recall" to have syntactic value (whatever that means), but if it doesn't, then we're back to: this is just a noun, and it's next to another noun.

But in any case, I'm not clear on what your objection is to having אל in construct, which seems like the easiest solution, along with most English versions. The article needs to be dealt with, but I think that happens.

And by the way, many thanks for coming back to this one -- very helpful!

@Susan I believe I have addressed many (or all?) of the points you make here in my latest edit. I did get caught up in my chosen gloss for אשר in thinking that was resumptive, when really it is more relative, so I corrected that, along with the clarity on the other points (I hope).

@Davïd With the SIII mini?

@ScottS Thanks, I'll let you be, though I still don't see how in your understanding בשת–אל is anything other than the head of a relative clause. "I [am] God. Bethel (where blah blah blah...). Up, go...." Which is syntactically incomplete. We need a finite verb (and a subject) (outside the relative clauses) for "Bethel" to be a nominative absolute. Resumptive elements occur not only after NA's but also in relative clauses.

^^^ fit into one comment and therefore counted as "letting you be". ;-)

@PaulVargas Ha! You have a good memory. ;) (And, yes!)

And while I'm at it -- @ScottS @Susan have you checked out GKC §127f? See also "e" for context. (This might well be old news -- I haven't followed at all closely!) There are some interesting examples of the syntax in there. No discussion of this text in Jouon-Muraoka, though. FWIW.

@Davïd Yeah, I saw that, but I haven't yet figured out why Scott doesn't want it to be in construct, so the article isn't yet a problem.

@Susan I have no major issue with it being considered in construct, since finding the information about the article on a construct, but that is still such a rare occurrence that it is quite possible that such is not intended (my software tells me both are considered absolute, and I understand why, since constructs do not normally have articles). So if it is not intended as construct, then what is it (is what I am trying to answer).

Now, if not construct, then the finite verb associated with the nominative absolute is the "arise" command that follows, and the subject is Jacob, as the Bethel name and relative description act as the nominative absolute to the command clause. So the name Bethel is a nominative absolute, and perhaps I should phrase my reference to the relative clause as it being the antecedent to that clause, rather than a nominative absolute to that clause.

So to be clear, we have Nominative Absolute (Bethel) > Relative clause (describing important points related to Bethel) > Independent clause (Command to Jacob related to the important points of Bethel, as both sets of promises related to the return to the land, which is the command).

@ScottS I suppose by my software you mean Logos.

@PaulVargas Yes.

@Davïd What do you make of this?

^^^ Is there any scholarly work that has been done that supports enegue's observations. I have to admit, some of his examples do move toward such an inference, but has a study been done to support this that you might be aware of?