deuteronomy, liz, response

Raymond de Hoop rdehoop at
Fri Mar 9 10:00:44 EST 2001

> what i appear to have at this point is the following: the bulk of kings is
> linguistically similar to amos/isaiah ca.700; whereas, the bulk/core of
> deuteronomy is similar to ezekiel/jeremiah ca.600.
> but there is material in deuteronomy that is late: e.g., chs. 31-32. also
> much of samuel, especially surrounding saul-to-david, especially 2 Samuel,
> is tentatively strata IV-V: e.g., using the first person sequential, parts
> of 2 Samuel stick out like a sore thumb. ;-)
> what i'm currently working on is the distribution of nunated nonpasts that
> characterizes deuteronomy.


will you allow me also some questions before you "leave"?

I just wondered where your starting point was. Did you start with the
linguistical data sec, without any strata division, which resulted in your
five strata. Or did you asume certain linguistic "benchmarks", or
Second question, is the amount of data not very small to allow such a
statistical parsing?



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list