[b-hebrew] Study on energic nun ter
kwrandolph at gmail.com
Mon Dec 3 13:01:03 EST 2007
Let's put the shoe on the other foot: does not the fact that your
unconventional ideas have failed to convince a single one of us, not even
among those of us who are inclined towards more unconventional ideas, argue
against the rightness of your ideas?
The sine-qua-non of lexicography is context. Etymology, or supposed
etymology, often has no role in the meanings as recognized by context. That
your definitions often fail the context test has convinced me that your
ideas are wrong. If your ideas are wrong in the area where I have my
greatest familiarity, how can I trust your other ideas?
I often don't read your posts anymore.
I can understand why others call for your expulsion.
Karl W. Randolph.
On Dec 3, 2007 7:09 AM, Isaac Fried <if at math.bu.edu> wrote:
> I am stunned. Does my right to express "very unconventional ideas
> about the Hebrew language" need be "consistently defended" by the
> moderators? Is b-Hebrew a list for only "conventional", or moderately
> unconventional, ideas about the the Hebrew language?
> I did not ridicule someone's words, I have just repeated someone's
> words verbatim.....
> It is really not clear to me how the "choice of words" is distinct
> from the "scholarly nature of the debate" and the "contending with
> the arguments themselves".
> I don't think it is "impossible to carry on a discussion with me."
> Difficult maybe, but not impossible. A scholarly discussion need not
> be easy, and one should go through it calmly and with fortitude. A
> scholarly interchange is decidedly not an ego trip. If you think my
> "unconventional ideas about the Hebrew language" are wrong, then
> prove them so to me and I will agree with you right away.
> On the other hand, you may be right that I should not enter into any
> debate with some members of this list.
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
More information about the b-hebrew