peterkirk at qaya.org
Thu Oct 21 01:03:54 EDT 2004
On 21/10/2004 05:33, Karl Randolph wrote:
>I started writing this off list to another person, but then realized that this goes to the reason I brought up the question in the first place.
>Is the Arabic the only recognized cognate language similarity to BLG? ...
It is the only one mentioned in BDB, which was all I claimed before.
Someone else gave further information from HALOT. I have now just opened
up HALOT, and there is a mention there of an Egyptian possible cognate
BRG, no meaning given, and a suggested link with BLQ which is "to
appear" in Syriac, "to dazzle" in Mandaean(?), and "to gleam" in Arabic.
>... With all the Hebrew uses of the root being pre-Exilic, making recorded Arabic uses well over a thousand years later as well as in a different language, how far can we trust the Arabic term to have the same meaning? Even in contemporanious uses Hebrew and Aramaic terms sometimes had very different meanings, Arabic, being so much later as well, is even further from Hebrew. Already Mishnaic Hebrew shows marked differences with Biblical Hebrew, and that was earlier than Arabic.
Indeed we cannot be sure that the meaning is the same. But in most cases
this kind of meaning change is either subtle or in rather obviously
peter at qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
More information about the b-hebrew