Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Ethel Jean (Kowan) Saltz" <macnietspingal AT airmail.net>]

========================================================================
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:04:15 -0500
From: davidfentonism AT aim.com
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <8C8DC9948FEA63B-C98-81EF AT FWM-R06.sysops.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


 Yes, and so the biblical Hebrew corresponded to its own cosmology which 
was Elohist/Yahvist. It was not inclusive of the ideologies of its neighbors 
or enemies, thus what it meant then is what it means today. The Hebrew is 
also dynamic and the Greek static, and in that sense incompetent to fully 
communicate Hebrew thoghtforms as seen in the examples provided by others 
(i.e., tsedakah/righteousness, Torah/Law, etc.).
==============================================================

About dynamic vs static language brings to mind a course that a corporation 
offered us.  Actually insisted we take.
The presenter was a Dr. Barbara Stuckey who published THE EXACT WORD.  She 
was a linguist.  She told us that Anglo-Saxon language was originally only 
oral.  (It has been my research since that it was the creation of the 
written Bible in Anglo-Saxon that created the English Language.)  She said 
that when they fixed the written language by Christian clergy, that they 
used the rules of Latin grammar which made English rigid.  She developed a 
list of 200 English words that would accomplish business communications. 
One of my fellow employees who came from IIRC Puerto Rico didn't want to 
attend.  He said he became a citizen and that was enough (back then you had 
to know English).  It wasn't long into the course that he said he was glad 
he attended, he learned a lot more about the comfort level of the English 
language.

Is this a further explanation of the quoted message?

Ethel Jean (Kowan) Saltz  Beltsville MD