Harold R. Holmyard III
hholmyard at ont.com
Thu Aug 25 09:02:08 EDT 2005
>Basically, we differ on methodology, and until we can
>come to a consensus on that, we will never come to a
>consensus on the other issues that divide us. You
>believe the scholarly consensus is infallible;
HH: I do not believe the scholarly consensus is infallible.
>While you base your
>studies on scholars and traditions, I base mine on
>methodology. One part of the methodology is that it is
>very rare for a lexeme to have two or more distinctly
>different definitions. Another part is to use an
>unpointed text. Another is where there are synonyms
>and antonyms recognized, that comparisons with these
>can help. And there are others.
HH: Your methodology comes up with poor results. I have witnessed it
for several years. I raised several detailed problems with your
thesis about XSD in my letter, and you have chosen to ignore them all
with the sweeping but empty words of your reply. I gave you analysis
of your ideas for your sake, not mine. If you come from a scholarly
background, then you should take the scholarly tradition in Hebrew
studies seriously, including my detailed comments.
More information about the b-hebrew