Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>]

On Friday 27 August 2004 17:17, MarianneLuban AT aol.com wrote:

[snip]
> Good for you!  But, don't forget, it was you who stated that I do not have
> the right to take part in any discussions on Biblical Hebrew--assuming that
> I do not know anything about that subject.  And yet--what do you think
> modern Hebrew is based on?  Chinese maybe?  Hebrew is Hebrew.  It is only
> those terms that had to be coined by the venerable Ben-Yehuda and those
> western terms that were incorporated that make the appreciable difference. 
[snip]

Whoa!  This definitely betrays a lack of knowledge, especially with regard to 
grammar.  In fact, William Chomsky, a noted scholar of modern Hebrew, said in 
so many words that modern Hebrew is more of an Indo-European language than a 
Semitic one.  Modern Hebrew is based much more on Mishnaic Hebrew than on 
biblical Hebrew, and grammatical patterns had undergone major changes between 
BH and MH.  Modern Hebrew, when it was created, went even beyond that.  
Grammatically speaking, there are more "appreciable difference[s]" than there 
are similarities.  "Hebrew is Hebrew."  Would you say the same thing about 
English?  Is modern American English the same as Middle English or 
Anglo-Saxon English?  This is absurd.

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"No good.  Hit on head."   -Gronk