b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: Niels Peter Lemche <npl AT teol.ku.dk>
- To: "'b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu'" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: RE: Cause he said so
- Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:18:45 +0200
From: Kimmo Huovila [SMTP:kimmo.huovila AT helsinki.fi]
Though this does not really give a complete answer to your question,
text linguistics can give an alternative, plausible analysis in some
cases where different sources have been proposed. The tendency in
the
past has been to propose different sources before examining all the
alternatives from the standpoint of text linguistics (no doubt,
partly
due to the fact that text linguistics is a relatively recent
discipline). However, in my opinion, the source critic should be
very
well equipped in text linguistics to have a solid basis for his
methodology.
Kimmo
The literray critics used a lot of linguistic argument when
proposing their theory. Of course it is from a modern view point a rather
primitive kind of linguistics but language was certainly a fixed part of the
argument for the source division. Of course most of this discussion was in
German but people in the USA who might not command the German vernacular
must realize that the discussion goes back to the beginning of the 18th
century and developed immensely during the 19th century in the
Graf-Kuenen-Wellhausen hypothesis.
NPL
-
Cause he said so,
barre, 09/07/2000
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Cause he said so, Kimmo Huovila, 09/09/2000
- Re: Cause he said so, Peter Kirk, 09/09/2000
-
RE: Cause he said so,
Liz Fried, 09/09/2000
- Re: Cause he said so, Peter Kirk, 09/10/2000
- RE: Cause he said so, Niels Peter Lemche, 09/10/2000
- Re: Cause he said so, Kimmo Huovila, 09/10/2000
- RE: Cause he said so, Liz Fried, 09/10/2000
- Re: Cause he said so, Alviero Niccacci, 09/11/2000
- Re: Cause he said so, Kimmo Huovila, 09/11/2000
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.