[b-hebrew] 2Sam24:1 v. Gen18:1-3

Read, James C K0434995 at kingston.ac.uk
Mon Aug 15 09:09:35 EDT 2005


Yitzhak wrote:
I skimmed it.  I am not a linguist and am not qualified to pass judgement on 
your theory.  But it appears to me that you attempt to build a case
out of three
exceptions.  One of them, is a problematic case in its own right, apparently 
being duplicated in the MT, which you try to explain away.  We have to 
remember that Biblical Hebrew is not uniform, and contains many editorial 
modifications.  It is not a pure document that can be analyzed using the same 
tools in linguistics, because it may contain imports from other languages 
(Phoenician? Israelite?) and different times.  While linguistic analysis can be 
used to analyze the majority of cases, you can never be sure if an exception 
is the result of an odd use of the language, different semantics of
the language,
or simply the result of editorial activity.  So I perceive that
starting an analysis
off of exceptions is methodologically problematic, as it makes certain 
assumptions about the text such as that the text is written in uniform
language,
of the same time, by the same hand, and does not contain editorial activity 
such as a conflation of multiple accounts.
END QUOTE

JCR: I'm sorry, but this is not a satisfactory answer. This is a total refusal to consider the
evidence and a stout sidestep away from it.
Name me one living language that behaves 100% uniform with no exceptions and then I will be able 
to give more credence to what you have just said. Also stating that your point of view is backed up 
by linguists doesn't help because it is usually a subconscious admission that one is not capable 
of proving his standpoint. We have only touched the iceberg of examples that break down this rigid 
view of subjects and sequential action and many more examples could be given.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list