Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 27/06/2004 20:32, Karl Randolph wrote:

> Peter:
>
> With “bear” I looked at its uses and found widely divergent meanings 
> depending on contexts. Looking at cognate languages verified that I was 
> dealing with different roots. (I could have looked at the history of English 
> language and arrived at the same conclusion, but the above is assuming the 
> situation with Hebrew, where we don’t have the history.)
>  

Maybe. But all that this proves is that "bear", which was not my choice 
of example, is not the best example I could have chosen. There are 
certainly better examples in English, of homonyms and apparent 
derivatives which could easily be slightly divergent senses from the 
same root, but are can in fact be proved to be from quite different 
roots. Just one random example but again not an ideal one: "potluck". 
Here in the UK I guess almost anyone would suggest a derivation from 
"luck", and perhaps "pot" in the sense that you put a ladle into a pot 
and take your chance as to what comes out. But in fact the word is known 
to be a loan from a Native American language.

> However, with XBL חבל within Biblical Hebrew, I have not 
> found widely divergent meanings. Therefore, I see no need to go to cognate languages to 
> look for different roots. That Arabic, for example, has two roots becomes irrevelant if 
> all uses in Biblical Hebrew can be seen as expressions of one root.
>
>  
My example of "potluck" shows that the lack of apparent need to look for 
different roots does not imply that the different roots do not exist.


--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/