04_Reymond_224_246 15/07/14 12:18 Pagina 238 238 ERIC D. REYMOND V. Purpose of Wordplay and Ambiguous Constructions Wordplay is not unique to Ben Sira, but is also found in other wisdom texts, like Proverbs, Qohelet, and Job. In these texts, the wordplay, especially that which is an integral part of a text’s ex- pression, reflects a conception of language on the part of the writ- ers/composers that is, in general, similar to Ben Sira’s, namely that ambiguous and confusing language can be exploited for expressive purposes. But, in these other texts, spoken or written expression is not a main focus, nor is it so obvious that one primary audience for the texts is future scribes or administrators. The fact that Ben Sira does discuss human language and communication at length in the context of scribal/administrative training means that the wordplay in Ben Sira and the ambiguity that it involves take on a significance not present in the same way in the other wisdom books. This is es- pecially true since, as demonstrated in some of the examples above, he uses wordplay as part of his discussion of communication. The practical function of such wordplay, in general, would have been two-fold: first, to train the reader to perceive the multivalency in- herent in words, verb forms, and syntax; and, second, to demon- strate how such ambiguities could be useful in creating one’s own “wise” expressions, perhaps, even to discover the inherent connec- tions between certain concepts or ideas. Although Ben Sira has no specific cautionary remarks in relation to the ambiguity generated through syntax, morphology, and phonology (he does not, for instance, warn his readers of the dan- gers inherent in the multivalency of words), nevertheless, it is safe to assume that as someone training future scribes and administra- tors, Ben Sira is keen on developing his students’ sensitivity to and dexterity with such multivalent symbols. The importance of general linguistic competence is stressed in many passages in Ben Sira. The one wise through words (evn lo,goij) makes himself beloved, the gratitude of fools is uttered in vain (Sir 20,13) 31. 31 The text differs from Ziegler’s edition, which has (instead of evn lo,goij) evn ovli,goij (attested in the single manuscript 253, while most others have the text above). The Hebrew is almost non-sensical. The Syriac does not exist, but the Latin (sapiens in verbis) supports evn lo,goij. Many understand the verse in a manner like that reflected in my translation above. See PETERS,