I just got the proofs for my pissing paper. It looks like it is scheduled to be published in the October issue of the CBQ. The editor’s and copyreader’s work was great. In several important ways, the proof is better than what I submitted. But a couple of strange things did happen in the process of moving from manuscript file to proof file. None is stranger than this,
Here’s the larger context, “For example, the genocidal context of 1 Kgs 11:16, עד־הכרית כל זכר באדום, ‘until he had destroyed every male in Edom,’ is similar שֹׂתהַת תֹ our passages.” The editors slightly reworked one of my rather awkward sentences. But I really think that instead of שֹׂתהַת תֹ, “to” might have been better. Were they just trying to get my attention? They did!