Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>]

Erm, I haven't personally read the massorah but from all those that 
have read it or portions of it I gather that the hebrew it contains 
is more than blatantly evidently much more modern in style and word 
usage.

On the matter of the number of phonemes, while I haven't studied the 
matter deep enough to formulate an opinion I do think the owness of 
proof is rather on us to prove Karl wrong in this matter than vice 
versa. The reason for this is clear. The unpointed text uses 22 
characters. In general, when languages invent a system of recording 
its sounds they try to use one character per sound. English is a great 
exception to this rule but to be frank, the English writing system is 
the bastardised product of countless conquests against our little 
fertile (and very wet) island. And so examples of English betrayal of 
this pattern would be completely irrelevant.
So, for this reason, unless we are to present convincing internal 
evidence to Karl that such was not the case, he is more than justified 
in believing that the consonants used in the hebrew text of the torah 
represent the whole range of the consonants that its author/s were 
capable of pronouncing.

There again we would do well to ask ourselves a few questions:

Where did moses learn to write hebrew?
In egypt he would have used hyroglyphs (please feel free to correct the 
spelling)
Did Abraham, Isaac & Jacob write? Did they learn to write from their 
Chaldean routes? Was the hebrew that Abraham spoke different to the 
hebrew that Moses spoke? Archaic yhwh seems to suggest that this was so.
Did moses learn to write hebrew in Egypt as part of his royal education?
Or did he learn it from his time with Jethro and the sheep?
Was the ability to write a sign of education? Or could all hebrews write?
Did the hebrews he left Egypt with help him to learn how to write as he had 
always 
read and written Egyptian prior?

On the matter of sin/shin I think Karl has good reason to believe these 
represented 
one sound. Take for example the English 'u' (I know, I am now officially a 
hypocrite).Not so long ago Peter said that English 'u' is like a russion 'a'.
Well, not for me it isn't! For me there is no difference between the 
'u' of run and the 'u' of bull. For Peter, they are two different phonemes 
and the 'u' of Peter's run is similar to my 'a' of ran. Estuary English goes 
the whole hog and I cannot distinguish the difference between my 'ran' 
and their 'run' and therefore have to rely on context to understand if they 
are referring to the past or the present. While this is an extreme example 
it does show how with time and dialectal differences, how one character can 
come to represent two phonemes when at one time in the history of the 
language 
it only represented one sound.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From gfsomsel AT juno.com  Thu Oct  6 21:05:06 2005
Return-Path: <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from m04.lax.untd.com (m04.lax.untd.com [64.136.30.67])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F0AE54C008
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu,  6 Oct 2005 21:05:05 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from m04.lax.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by m04.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABBWMUPHA6BZMNS
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org> (sender <gfsomsel AT juno.com>);
        Thu,  6 Oct 2005 18:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from gfsomsel AT juno.com)
        by m04.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id K6NYRC6F;
        Thu, 06 Oct 2005 18:03:52 PDT
To: kwrandolph AT email.com
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 21:15:57 -0400
Message-ID: <20051006.211557.-516929.0.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-27,35-52,55-60
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
X-ContentStamp: 19:9:3428974042
X-UNTD-OriginStamp: 
w3STQS63J+y68QsFU7oRtN3AsiueCCDdpZI13keOgwT++gXtnwxXCQ=X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 
127.0.0.1|localhost|m04.lax.untd.com|gfsomsel AT juno.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Ayin and Ghayin
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, 07 Oct 2005 01:05:06 -0000

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 16:41:29 -0500 "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
writes:
> Yitzhak:
>
> You're just like Vadim, impossible!

+++++++++++++

Karl,

If anyone is like Vadim, it is YOU.

+++++++++++++

> When I read documents like the Gezar Calendar and the
> Siloam Inscription, I find writing entirely consistent with
> examples found in pre-Exile Tanakh. Give me a clear
> enough image and I have no trouble reading the text.
> Have you ever read Tanakh from cover to cover?
> <SNIP>
> What does this tradition have to do with an analysis of the
> unpointed Hebrew text? Huh??
>
> Have you ever *read* the unpointed text cover to cover?

++++++++++++
Karl,

I doubt seriously that you have read the TANAK from cover to cover.  You
had to admit that you didn't know what to do with a passage from Job, and
there have been other other instances in which you seemed very much at a
loss.  If I were you I would drop this bit about reading the Hebrew text
from cover to cover (and especially the point about reading the unpointed
text) since I find it totally unimpressive though I know you are
attempting to impress everyone with your prowess at Hebrew.  It only
makes you a laughing-stock.
++++++++++++

> In closing, I have come to the conclusion that you don't
> know Biblical Hebrew. Oh, you may have taken a class or
> two in it, learning the paradigms presented in grammar
> textbooks, but that is a far cry from reading the text cover
> to cover. You have not analyzed even a simple, small
> book like Ruth using an unpointed text, let alone the
> whole Tanakh. All you do is parrot the beliefs of others. If
> you were handed a document in archaic Hebrew script,
> could you read it? I can. Apparently you love to argue just
> to argue, well go on without me.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.

++++++++++++

You would do well to take "a class or two" learning Hebrew.  Don't try to
impress me with your supposed prowess at reading the unpointed text from
cover to cover.  You're a phoney.

++++++++++++

george
gfsomsel
___________