Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] comparative historical linguistics was Re: Nun-Tav-Vet root

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: "Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>
  • Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] comparative historical linguistics was Re: Nun-Tav-Vet root
  • Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:23:58 +0000

On 28/11/2006 00:16, Bryant J. Williams III wrote:
Dear Peter,

As the voice of moderation where you can see the evidence from both sides,
let me ask you this question.

It seems that the disagreement over the "shin," "sin," West Semitic,
Biblical Hebrew, etc. is on what presuppositions come to the table? For
example, If I believe that text of the Tanakh (the Law of Moses) was written
during the period of the Exodus of 1446-45 to 1407-1406 BC, then I believe
that Biblical Hebrew began at THAT time. If I believe that Tanakh (Law of
Moses) was not written until sometime later (usually after Rameses II), then
I will include Biblical Hebrew as part of he West Semitic dialects including
Ugaritic. Furthermore, whichever view I go with, these presuppositions will
be reflected in the discussion of the comparative historical linguistics.

Yes, but the difference here is largely one of terminology. I think everyone (except presumably those who believe that the Exodus did not happen at all) would accept that the early Israelites in Egypt, and continuing as they left Egypt and moved to Canaan, spoke a NW Semitic language form which developed continuously into the biblical Hebrew of the monarchy period. As such it is not unreasonable to call this language, as spoken at the time of the Exodus, something like early Hebrew. As for whether the Torah was composed in this early Hebrew and subsequently unchanged (such that early Hebrew is biblical Hebrew), or was composed in early Hebrew and later updated into something more like the Hebrew of the monarchy period, or was not composed at all until the monarchy period, we really don't know apart from any faith positions we might take.

And then there is the separate issue of the writing down of the Torah. We really don't know when, in what script, and in precisely what language form it was written down - again apart from faith positions. Now it seems that Karl's faith position (please correct me if I have got this wrong) is that the Torah was written down in the 15th century BCE in precisely the consonantal form which is preserved in the Masoretic Text, with no changes even in orthography (although apparently he allows changes to letter shapes). He is welcome to this position, but I think it goes beyond the position held by the majority even of those who take a very high view of the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. After all the verses in Deuteronomy which speak of Moses writing down the law do not say what script he used.

There is also the question of whether the 22 letter script was created originally for what I have called early Hebrew. Well, there is evidence of a similar script being used in Egypt before the time of the Exodus, but no proof that the Hebrew script derives at all directly from this. All we can say is that the first clear evidence for a 22 letter script is from some centuries after the Exodus. Unfortunately Karl's faith position about the original orthography of the Torah cannot be taken as evidence.

It seems that Yitzhak and Karl need to step back and stop the name calling,
etc. Scholarship must be INTELLECTUALLY HONEST. Using phrases which will
cause anger, etc., is WRONG! I no horse in this race, but it seems to me
that unless this horserace sticks to what the texts show, and start using
phrases like "maybe," "possibly" (not the same as probable or absolute),
etc., then this thread has gotten out of hand and should be closed for a
while. What is you take?

I agree with you. Thanks for your voice of moderation here.


--
Peter Kirk
E-mail: peter AT qaya.org
Blog: http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page