Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Vadim Cherny" <vadim_lv AT center-tv.net>]

Jack Kilmon wrote:

> One's religious opinions should be disassociated from serious discussion
of
> linguistics.  I'm sorry, but ALL of the above, including the homophobia
and
> "designed language" stuff makes no sense whatsoever.

This brings us all the way back to the old discussion of the designed
language. Silly as it may sound, I do adhere to this theory to considerable
extent. It is beyond question that in many cases the third radical was added
to the first two, forming a new root. In cases far too many for coincidence,
there is a well known relation: further in alphabet is the third radical,
lighter is the root meaning (pr root being a classic example). Many roots
are a clear combination of two two-letter cells. Even some hematrical
exercises look beyond coincidence. There are several studies on the letter
semantics, suggesting that semantics of two-letter cells is predetermined by
the letter semantics. Similarly, there seems to be semantical meaning beyond
the verb stems, though certainly many words drifted away from the stem
meaning. This stuff is open to different interpretations, but
it shouldn't be squarely dismissed simply because the implications are
inconvenient.

Vadim Cherny