[b-hebrew] Potiphar's title

Peter Kirk peter.r.kirk at ntlworld.com
Thu Jul 10 19:38:46 EDT 2003


On 10/07/2003 15:54, Dave Washburn wrote:

> ... So my
>
>question is, "how was such a consensus (assuming it really is such) arrived 
>at?"  Until I know that, I have no way to determine whether someone's 
>"research" is accurately based, built on speculation, or circular reasoning 
>(e.g. Akkadian is "early" and Genesis is "late" therefore such and such a 
>word in Genesis MUST be a loanword from Akkadian, which proves that Genesis 
>is "late").  ...
>  
>
There must be more to it than this, Dave. See the scholars cited by K-B 
in my response to Stephen. Also, if as you suggested this word is part 
of the common Semitic stock, instead of being Akkadian ša rēši “the one 
at the head” > Hebrew saris, it would be Hebrew še rō'š, or 'ašer rō'š 
“the one at the head”. I'm not sure why Akkadian š becomes Hebrew s when 
borrowed, but you can hardly argue that Hebrew š (shin) becomes Hebrew s 
(samek).

-- 
Peter Kirk
peter.r.kirk at ntlworld.com
http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list