Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: targums

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jack Kilmon <jkilmon AT historian.net>
  • To: Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>
  • Cc: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: targums
  • Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 07:43:25 -0500




Ian Hutchesson wrote:
>
> At 23.42 14/05/99 -0500, Jack Kilmon wrote:
> >Targums are very Jewish, Dan. They can be a paraphrase or a direct
> >translation of a Hebrew text in the common language...Aramaic.
>
> Understand of course that this is only Jack's point of view

And the view of the majority of ANE historians and linguists.


> -- and that of
> many -- who want to believe that Hebrew was not a working language of the
> day, despite the fact that there were three dialects of Hebrew evidenced at
> Qumran, and a literature showing that Hebrew was seen as a spoken language,
> ie phonetic decisions were being made by the scribes. (A perusal of
> Qimron's book on DSS Hebrew should show the living nature of the
> phonological decisions of the scribes.)

The view that Hebrew was not a working language of the day is
no longer held by "many." Hebrew was indeed a living language,
developing dialects, among certain social pockets, including
the religious elite and certainly the DSS people, whether the
scrolls were from a sequestered group at Qumran, Jerusalem or
perhaps even the temple itself. It was not the evry day
language of the common folk.

If Hebrew was the common tongue of the common folk, there
would be no Targums, would there?

>
> So it is unlikely that there was a simplistic situation in which one could
> describe Aramaic as the "common language".

Well, we have been down this road before.

Jack

>
> >Targums such as Onkelos were used in the synagogues to translate Torah
> >readings for Jews who spoke primarily Aramaic. Later Targums such as
> >the Palestinian Targum and Pseudo-Jonathan were more midrashic in form.
> >The Leviticus Targum from the Dead Sea Scrolls was a literal translation
> >in Aramaic from the 2nd century BCE. The Targum of Job, also from the
> >DSS and dated to the early 1st century is also primarily a literal
> >translation very close to the MT.
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: jkilmon AT historian.net
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.

--
______________________________________________

taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon

Jack Kilmon
jkilmon AT historian.net

http://www.historian.net




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page