Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re[4]: Diachronic study (was Purpose for discussion)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Peter Kirk"<peter_kirk AT sil.org>
  • To: <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re[4]: Diachronic study (was Purpose for discussion)
  • Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 11:53:14 -0500


Fair enough. Actually the need for a cross-disciplinary approach
applies to synchronic as well as diachronic linguistics; neither
should not be studied apart from the sociolinguistic environment. As
many have pointed out, "sociolinguistics" is not really linguistics at
all but is a branch of sociology. And of course sociology of an
ancient society can be approached only through archaeology, epigraphy
etc as you mention.

But this approach, if followed to its logical conclusion, tends to
make scholarship impossible. It is just not possible for every scholar
of the past to become an expert in all the fields which you mention.
While cross-disciplinary study is necessary, it is also close to
impossible. As I see it, the best way out of this impasse is for
scholars in one discipline to be allowed to present their case in
scholarly journals from one side (with explicit recognition that they
have not dealt with every side of the matter) and then engage in
constructive dialogue with experts in the other fields involved. I
hope that a forum like this list is a suitable place for such
constructive dialogue. But for this to happen, we have to resist the
temptation to write off as unscholarly those who have (consciously and
explicitly) approached a matter from one direction only.

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Re[3]: Diachronic study (was Purpose for discussion)
Author: <mc2499 AT mclink.it> at Internet
Date: 22/02/2000 17:03

<snip>

If we are dealing with synchronic linguistics, a linguist may present
linguistic only arguments. Yet, if we are dealing with diachronic
linguistics, we need a manner to anchor the information into a historical
space. To deal with the various sources needed for a linguistic study one
needs the historical component.

The necessity to deal with aspects of history in this day and age requires
cross-discinplinary expertise: linguistic, iconographic,
epigraphic/philological, economic, archaeological, and whatever else is
seen as relevant. We can no longer afford single disciplinary analyses of
most matters from the past.


Ian

<snip>





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page