Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Michael Abernathy" <mabernathy AT isot.com>]

      I think you should reconsider your choice of examples.  In the
nineteenth century, the American language was undergoing quite a few
changes.  In New York they had a large number of European immigrants that
contributed to the language. In California, you have a number of interesting
things that would have been happening. Early in the nineteenth century, the
dominant language was Spanish. When English became the dominant language, it
took a large number of loan words from the Spanish.  You would also see a
large number of loan words from various native American tribes.  Some of
those eventually made it to New York.  I am not certain that some of them
ever did. In any case, California would be a rather unique example.  They
didn't merely have occasional contact because of yearly feasts, as in the
case of Israel.  They had a massive migration due to the gold rush.  I
suspect that a proper study comparing the development of the English
language in these two areas could be the subject of a number of
dissertations.
    As for the mobility of the Hebrew people, I seem remember reading
several articles to the effect that  Galilean Hebrew was dialectically
different than that of Jersualem both in the Old Testament period and in the
New Testament period.
Further, I suggested that if the language of the Hebrew Bible was indeed
uniform, and that there were no editorial process involved, then the work
would appear to have been written in  very limited chronological and
geographical limits.  Personally, I don't subscribe to the possibility that
it was so limited as to eliminate dialectical differences.  I would be more
prone to think that we simply have a limited ability to recognize those
differences.
Sincerely Yours,
Michael Abernathy
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
To: "George F. Somsel" <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Cc: <mabernathy AT isot.com>; <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2004 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] exodus, dating of linguistics


> On 29/05/2004 13:48, George F. Somsel wrote:
>
> >It shouldn't be surprising that Californians of the 19th cent would use
> >English in much the same fashion as those in the east since a good many
> >Californians of that time were eastern transplants.  It would rather be
> >surprising if they didn't.
> >
> >gfsomsel
> >
> >
>
> Well, precisely. When populations are mobile, for one reason or another,
> language diversity is reduced. And there may be other factors which can
> cause this. In ancient Israel, one possible factor would be the three
> annual pilgrimages which would bring people together from all parts of
> the country. We certainly should not assume that there was great
> language diversity, as Michael has, and argue from that that originally
> diverse texts must have been edited for consistency. That may be true,
> but this is not proof of it.
>
> -- 
> Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
>