Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Language Evolution - Out of Bounds - Stare decisis

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
  • To: <tladatsi AT charter.net>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Language Evolution - Out of Bounds - Stare decisis
  • Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 08:15:15 +0100

Fair enough. I didn't get that particular communication. I do admit that I
don't
see how the linguistic origin of the hebrew language and its cognates is out
of
bounds on a b-hebrew linguistic mailing list but I'm sure that such a
decision
was made without any kind of prejudice and so from now on will make a
concerted
effort to agree with all priori non-linguistic assumptions that are for some
reason considered 'in bounds' while all biblical evidence on the matter is
considered 'out of bounds'.

Thanx for passing the decision on.


-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of tladatsi AT charter.net
Sent: Fri 9/23/2005 6:00 AM
To: Read, James C
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] Language Evolution - Out of Bounds - Stare decisis

James,

Well, I was commenting more on the radio-carbon dating
issue. However, I did find a precident on this topic on
this list (before I joined), see below:

Stare decisis-

Wed Jun 16 15:07:27 EDT 2004

Dear b-hebrew,

Even the evolution of languages is not a topic of
discussion within the mission of b-hebrew. Please end this
topic, and get back on track.

Bryan Rocine
b-hebrew co-chair




> From: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
> Date: 2005/09/22 Thu AM 08:58:46 EDT
> To: <tladatsi AT charter.net>
> CC: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] Language Evolution - Out of
Bounds
>
>
> While I agree with you that this topic has the potential
to go
> out of bounds (especially when we have to explian to you
the
> limitations of dating techniques) I disagree that the
discussion
> is completely out of bounds.
>
> The amount of time that Arabic, Hebrew, Ugaritic, Aramaic
etc. had
> to divrsify from their common ancestor has a direct
relevance on the
> linguistic discussion.
> Historic tesimonies of the origin of the Arabic language
are scarce
> but Genesis tells us that Ishmael came from Abraham's
loins and it
> is reasonable to assume that they spoke the same
language. As Arabic
> tradition does not contradict the long held tradition
that Ishmael
> became the father of the Arabian nation it is not
impossible that
> the Arabic language and the Hebrew of the bible came from
the
> language that Abraham spoke. Now, Abraham is described as
a hebrew.
> Exactly what that term means we do not know. If the
language he spoke
> was exactly the same as the hebrew we see in the bible,
we do not know
> either. Archaic forms such as YHWH seem to suggest that
the language
> had adapted slightly by the days of Moshe and this is not
unreasonable
> as the language would undoubtedly have been affected by a
few hundred
> years of Egyptian slavery.
>
> However, your sweeping claims that all who doubt the
authenticity of
> dating methods are motivated by blind faith was a little
unwarranted.
> I am not some religious maniac born into a Christian
family who has
> brainwashed into rejecting everything that slightly
contradicts the bible.
> I come from a very strong scientific background and am
more qualified to
> speak science than linguistics, especially chemistry
(more especially
> thermodynamics and reaction feasibility). I only became
interested in
> linguistics after being converted by strong scientific
proofs of Yah's
> existence and I can assure you that I was well aware of
the limitations
> of dating well before this time. Your summarial position
on dating betrays
> a surface knowledge of scientific dating methods and it
is you who are
> not acquainted with the facts and are reacting out of a
'faith position'.
>
> Without going into the technicalities (and risking going
out of bounds)
> it is only common sense that when you see that various
scientific dating
> methods vary in different orders of magnitude for the
same object that
> each method is based on different variables and presents
different
> limitations. Your idea that people on this list have
expressed a flat
> refusal to consider scientific dating evidence is more
than a little
> extreme and all who have expressed their limitations have
adequately shown
> that they are more acquainted with the facts than
yourself. No-one here is
> dissing the methods as completely useless and your idea
that that is the case
> is completely unfounded. In many cases the dating methods
can give us a
> relative model and can tell us without a shadow of a
doubt what happened
> before what, although in certain circumstances even here
caution must be
> exercised. In conclusion, dating methods are useful for
constructing a
> relative model but cannot and should not be used as
absolute indications
> of dates.
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the
MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>

Jack Tladatsi
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk Fri Sep 23 03:54:57 2005
Return-Path: <k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mail57.messagelabs.com (mail57.messagelabs.com
[195.245.230.115])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DCEF24C00C
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 03:54:56 -0400
(EDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-57.messagelabs.com!1127462094!87522614!1
X-StarScan-Version: 5.4.15; banners=kingston.ac.uk,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [141.241.2.22]
Received: (qmail 10500 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2005 07:54:54 -0000
Received: from kuexim3.king.ac.uk (141.241.2.22)
by server-12.tower-57.messagelabs.com with SMTP;
23 Sep 2005 07:54:54 -0000
Received: from [141.241.17.18] (helo=KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk)
by kuexim3.king.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1EIiOT-0005PM-VN; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 08:54:54 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 08:54:52 +0100
Message-ID:
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F874EEBA AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [b-hebrew] tenses
Thread-Index: AcXADziIOBLEjES2QjqyNuc1fxM5nQABB3xP
From: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
To: "Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] tenses
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 07:54:57 -0000


Having reread your posts vadim it seems that you are saying the exact same
thing as
Rolf but from a different perspective.

You are saying that the major use is a future tense. Rolf says the same thing.

You are saying that there are cases where the same form is used with a
deictic
past reference (this you attribute to a 'deictic shift'). Rolf agrees that
the same
form is used in past reference.

You are saying that the form does not have inherent aspect in the traditional
sense.
Rolf is saying the exact same thing.

In fact, in conclusion, you are saying that neither tense nor aspect is
grammaticalised
in the form yet it is evident which tense is the major usage. Rolf is saying
the exact
same thing.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From peterkirk AT qaya.org Fri Sep 23 06:27:12 2005
Return-Path: <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from pan.hu-pan.com (unknown [67.15.6.3])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A5CE4C00C
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 06:27:12 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from 213-162-124-237.peterk253.adsl.metronet.co.uk
([213.162.124.237] helo=[10.0.0.1])
by pan.hu-pan.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52)
id 1EIklq-0002F9-B6; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 11:27:10 +0100
Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.0.344 [267.11.5]);
Fri, 23 Sep 2005 11:22:32 +0100
Message-ID: <4333D768.9080102 AT qaya.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 11:22:32 +0100
From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: Vadim Cherny <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
References: <001c01c5ba26$66aec320$b500a8c0@stoneyb><4329C78A.90802 AT qaya.org>
<004701c5bade$74e3a830$0b64a8c0@vadim><432B50B0.8000209 AT qaya.org>
<006d01c5bb54$be84ac20$261d000a@vadim><432DF212.2020204 AT qaya.org>
<003c01c5bcec$62cd90b0$261d000a@vadim><432E9658.20503 AT qaya.org><002301c5bd51$625c6470$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<432F5D56.70709 AT isot.com>
<005701c5bdf1$688594c0$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<43302A8B.4030207 AT qaya.org>
<006a01c5be7c$86f2d310$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<433147D1.2060707 AT qaya.org>
<002001c5bec5$abe34440$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<43318EC9.5070209 AT qaya.org>
<006a01c5bf4f$edd7c670$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<433294D2.2090600 AT qaya.org>
<002101c5bf6f$df30a770$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<4332A51B.4030401 AT qaya.org>
<000f01c5bf9a$7454a3e0$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<43330837.9040803 AT qaya.org>
<001f01c5bfba$6c66dcf0$261d000a@athlon64x2>
<43334121.9030008 AT qaya.org>
<002d01c5c00f$194c4b40$261d000a@athlon64x2>
In-Reply-To: <002d01c5c00f$194c4b40$261d000a@athlon64x2>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - pan.hu-pan.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.ibiblio.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - qaya.org
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] tenses
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 10:27:12 -0000

On 23/09/2005 08:18, Vadim Cherny wrote:

> ...
>
>>> Continuous or repetitive? How many times, in your Gen2 examples, the
>>> earth was watered? ...
>>
>>
>> Continuously, every day.
>
>
> Every day? At any rate, no more than one day. Then the earth became
> watered, and the action became inessential. ...


Until the sun shone, the ground dried up, and the trees in the garden
started to wither. Hey, surely that can happen even in Russia in summer,
if you don't water a garden or park at least every few days.


> ... Somehow I don't see heavenly mist watering the earth today.


I did this morning. It was a misty night and there was dew on the
ground, enough to keep my lawn growing. In some places in the world
today this is very regular - there is enough mist and dew to support
significant vegetation even though it almost never rains. I think this
is true of the coast of northern Chile - inland is the Atacama Desert,
but the coastal strip is quite verdant because of heavy mists and dew.
And there may well be similar conditions in parts of the Middle East.
Anyway, this verse refers to past conditions in the Garden of Eden, so
it is irrelevant whether this happens today.
...

>>
>> Not true. I deny that English "would" is future-related.
>
>
> Look at its etymology, then.


Its etymology, like that of "will", is a verb meaning "want", as in "he
willed it to happen" - the remaining rare use of "will" as an
independent verb has a regularised morphology but certainly the same
origin. Anyway, etymology is largely irrelevant to current meaning.


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



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.5/110 - Release Date: 22/09/2005





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page