[b-hebrew] Hebrew as a Spoken Language vs. Aramaic

dwashbur at nyx.net dwashbur at nyx.net
Mon Oct 29 20:37:58 EDT 2007



On 29 Oct 2007 at 17:14, K Randolph wrote:

> Dear Bryant:
> 
> On 10/29/07, Bryant J. Williams III <bjwvmw at com-pair.net> wrote:
> > Dear Dave,
> >
> > ... Furthermore, it appears
> > from Ruth that she understood and spoke Hebrew. Just from the conversations with
> > Naomi and her husband, her deceased husband, Boaz, etc.
> >
> > Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
> >
> Ruth is a bad example, for a couple reasons:
> 
> 1) she lived about 700 years before Ezra and Nehemiah, or over a
> thousand years before Mishnaic Hebrew
> 
> 2) she spoke Moabite, a language that even at the time of Mesha of the
> Mesha Stele, the written evidence shows probably less difference
> between Moabite than, let's say, Chicago and Mobile, or BBC English
> and Cockney. So Ruth may not have had to learn Hebrew in order to
> understand it. Or put in another way, there was less difference
> between Moabite and Hebrew of her day, than the Hebrew of her day and
> Mishnaic Hebrew.

I would add that since she was marrying a Hebrew, she would naturally have learned his 
language.  So I'm not sure her knowing Hebrew is anything significant.

Dave Washburn
Why do it right when you can do it again?



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list