Biblical Hebrew Forum

[kwrandolph <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Chris:

I think it is a bunch of malarkey.

Seriously, though, when there are no set spelling rules, then 
spelling variations are just that, variations, neither right nor 
wrong. As a result, I don't put much thought into the variations that 
I see while reading. So far I have noticed no rhyme nor reason to 
those variations (but I didn't expect to find any) and think they are 
no different than when a report from the Lewis and Clark expedition 
spelled "bear" (the big, growly and furry critter) three different 
ways in one sentence. As such, spelling variations are not "deficient 
spelling".

On the question of grammar, yes previous researchers did work out 
grammatical rules. For example, the belief that all Hebrew words had 
triliteral roots goes way back, if I'm not mistaken. I disagree with 
it, but that's gist for a different message. That such grammatical 
rules may appear to be 'unorthodox' by today's standards is an 
understatement, but the ancients did understand the concept.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: wattswestmaas <wattswestmaas AT eircom.net>
>  I am interested to hear your comments please........
>
>  I ... did come accross a very 'small'
>  paragraph in a letter in response to somebody else...they were
>  talking about 'Deficient spelling' and I
>  gathered from the gist of what must have been talked about that they were
>  conferring about the fact that assigning grammatical rules are not the sole
>  priviledge of 20th century advances in the understanding of language and
>  linguistics.  I gathered too from the reply that someone must have said that
>  the 'Biblical hebrew' of the hebrews had its grammatical rules which may
>  well have appeared 'unorthodox' to todays scholars.  But the climax came
>  when the rabbi said that deficient spelling was a grammatical rule! also
>  indicating (surprise surprise) a deficiency in the noun or concept that lay
>  in the sentence.
>
>  What are your thoughts please?