Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Richard Steiner on Sin and Shin

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Richard Steiner on Sin and Shin
  • Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 19:16:42 +0000

On 09/01/2007 18:47, K Randolph wrote:
...
You can ignore me, that's no problem. But why were those others
"disproved"? Was it on the basis of theory, or new observation? ...

Ask Yitzhak, it was he who mentioned this. Actually he provided (on 3rd January) some quotes in German, which I think you understand if he doesn't. Here again is the relevant quote from Noldeke, 1873, as given by Yitzhak:
Aber entscheidend ist fu:r die Urspru:nglichkeit des $ die Thatsache,
dass dasselbe im Arabischen ganz anders reflectirt wird als &; jenes
na:mlich durch [Arabic Shin], dieses durch [Arabic sin] oder [Arabic
tha]. Mithin ist anzuerkennen, dass die alten Hebra:er mit ihrem #
zwei a:hnliche Laute ausdru:ckten, von denen aber der eine mit der
Zeit ganz den Laut des [Samekh] annahm.

But you would do better to re-read that post of Yitzhak's.

... The
amount of new discoveries from known Biblical Hebrew in the last
century is miniscule, so what was it? For all intents and purposes, we
all are working from the same data.

What, the DSS are minuscule? And the evidence from Ugarit? And many other smaller finds? In fact Noldeke's argument goes back to 1873 which puts it before the discoveries of the Amarna letters and the Cairo geniza as well. So there is plenty of new data to consider.

--
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