Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Peter Kirk" <Peter_Kirk AT sil.org>]

Dear NPL,

Welcome back to this list!

I wonder if you can explain the distinction you make below between
"developed literary" forms of language and colloquial ones? Do you have
objective criteria for distinguishing between these, when you find both in
different written texts? I am afraid that I am sceptical of such
distinctions; even if they are valid in Latin, they certainly need not be in
Hebrew.

Peter Kirk

----- Original Message -----
From: Niels Peter Lemche <npl AT teol.ku.dk>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 5:29 PM
Subject: RE: Hebrew language, antiquity of ?


Dear Liz,

<snip>

We should never forget that standard biblical Hebrew represents a highly
developed literary kind of Hebrew. It need not be older neither younger than
other forms of the language. It's like Latin: what is the oldest form?
Cicero's elaborate literary written Latin or the spoken Latin sometimes
showing up in Horace's poems? When I first read Horace, I was stunned: His
spoken Latin was so colloquial and in some ways much closer to Italian than
Cicero's learned language.

 <snip>

NPL

<snip>