Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] cognate languages was Doctorates or not (was Re: XSD)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] cognate languages was Doctorates or not (was Re: XSD)
  • Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 07:54:37 -0500

Peter:

What I object to is the attitude (at least as I perceive it) that cognate
languages can prove or disprove something within Biblical Hebrew itself. Even
Mishnaic Hebrew has enough differences as to be suspect.

For example, the Ayin in Hebrew was one letter. There is no reason from
within the language to suspect that it stands for more than one phone or
phoneme. The only evidence is from cognate languages or a later development
of Hebrew. The same with the sin/shin split or any other letter where modern
"scholarship" assumes multiple phone(me)s for individual letters. The same is
true for word meanings, roots or any of the like.

Further, I have repeatedly objected to "evidence" from "proto-Semitic" as
proto-Semitic is purely a scholarly invention based on what I believe, from
historical evidence, to be illegitimate presuppositions.

What I do is to sweep cognate languages off their pedistals from being queens
over Hebrew to being lowly scullary maids who still have some legitimate role
to play in studying Hebrew.

Cognate langyages are useful, albeit in a very limited role, in the study of
Biblical Hebrew. What I object to or ignore are what I believe are
illegitimate uses of cognate languages.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
>
> On 03/09/2005 21:20, Karl Randolph wrote:
>
> > No, there are advantages, and disadvantages, to both. One of the
> > disadvantages to what I have done is revealed in my repeated
> > requests on this forum for what cognate languages can reveal for
> > some of the rarely used terms in Tanakh.
> >
> >
>
> Karl, this is not my understanding of what you have done. It seems
> to me that rather you have repeatedly rejected or ignored all
> information given to you about what cognate languages can reveal
> for such terms. Indeed I thought you had rejected the principle
> that cognate languages can help, certainly that the common
> scholarly understanding of cognate languages can help.
>
...
>
> -- Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/

--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm




  • Re: [b-hebrew] cognate languages was Doctorates or not (was Re: XSD), Karl Randolph, 09/04/2005

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page