if at math.bu.edu
Fri Jun 27 14:55:35 EDT 2008
1. We moving in circles and becoming, I am afraid, tiresome. This
discussion may also belong in a Linguistics forum not here, but it
has, nevertheless, at its core, a fundamental issue pertaining to
2. Linguistics is not an exact science, if at all, and one can not
"demonstrate" anything by the force of its use.
3. The assertion that "general linguistics can define meaning/
semantics" is patently and thoroughly paltry. We don't need "general
linguistics" to DEFINE something.
4. What you call "linguistic methodology" is of concern to students
of linguistics only, it has no bearing whatsoever on the study of
Hebrew etymology and grammar. For example, the question if a certain
"linguistic unit" is a morpheme or not is of interest to a
linguistics student only, wanting on a test to please his professor
and get a good grade. Otherwise, the correct answer to this question
is WE DON'T GIVE A HOOT.
5. You are making a grave mistake in spurning my ideas on the
structure of the Hebrew word. They are possibly the most significant,
if not the ultimate, contribution to the understanding of the Hebrew
language in the last 1000 years. If you miss them it will be your own
Isaac Fried, Boston University
More information about the b-hebrew