Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Semitics" <semitics AT gmail.com>]

Dear list-members,

I usually read (quite) all the messages of this list, even if I do not write
so often. I precise that I am not a scholar (even if I am well acquainted
with Biblical Hebrew and other Semitic languages), but have learnt a lot in
the last years from the respectable opinions of all the members, even when
they exposed innovative or "strange" ideas.

I was also surprised about the manner how debate on Furuli's model was
managed. I mean, I can still remember some interesting comments by Bryan
Rocine's on text-segmentation and yiqtols that he posted some months ago,
and even if I and other list-members cannot agree fully with this model, it
seems that no one thought to insult him or to say that discussion was not
allowed because of Bryan's personal ideas (that I completely ignore, BTW).

However, I was really perplexed in relation to the personal attacks that I
saw few days ago against Rolf Furuli. It seems that it was used shamelessly
an ad hominem argumentation. Furuli has been attacked for his private
beliefs, rather than proving that his theory is scientifically true or
false. This is not a good basis for sane discussion. 

Furuli's ideas could be wrong or not acceptable: but it is necessary before
to analyze his model and (maybe) to read his thesis, as David Kummerow did.
I like B-Hebrew for its high level of scholar discussion, and I hope that
this "academic" approach will be a distinguishing feature of this list also
for the future.

Regards,
Alberto Arena

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] Per conto di kenneth greifer
Inviato: mercoledì 21 marzo 2007 5.34
A: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Oggetto: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues

I am not a scholar, and I have not understood anything in the argument about

Rolf's dissertation or whatever the discussion has been about. I am just 
curious about how scholars debate normally. Is the debate that you've been 
doing on B-Hebrew the normal way that scholars discuss controversial 
subjects or is this somehow different? Also, when someone has a 
controversial opinion like Rolf, don't scholars analyze the ideas right away

because it sounds like his ideas have been around for a while and no one has

analyzed them. Maybe I did not understand the discussion, but it sounds like

this to me.

Kenneth Greifer
USA

_________________________________________________________________
Live Search Maps  find all the local information you need, right when you 
need it. http://maps.live.com/?icid=hmtag2&FORM=MGAC01

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.15/728 - Release Date: 20/03/2007
8.07