Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

Art,

Our good neighbor Mr. Golem is a shy, private, person and we should  
leave him alone. He is admittedly one of the lesser prophets, yet  
some of his short term prophesies, especially those concerning the  
ups and downs of the stock market, have manifestly come true. Now and  
then it crosses my mind that he is also possibly one of the  
undercover 36 righteous man, but who knows.

The Hebrew word Golem (See PS. 139:16) is derived from the root GLM,  
and is not related to English: 'glom, gloom, glum'. The root GLM is a  
bona fide member of the root family: BLM, GLM, XLM, CLM, $LM, TLM,  
all meaning ' to be massive, to be substantial, to be wholesome'.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Mar 31, 2007, at 10:51 PM, Arthur Gershman wrote:

> Dear Isaac,
> Thank you for your email, the point of which I am sympathetic,  
> although on which I am ambivalent.
> Who is Mr. Golem?
> I know what a golem is but your email contains a puzzle which I am  
> unable to unravel.
> Best regards,
> Art Gershman
>
> Ben Zoma said: Who is wise?  Those who learn from all people.   
> Pirkei Avot 4:1
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Isaac Fried
> To: Rolf Furuli
> Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 10:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Question for Rolf on the JW outlook on the  
> Hebrew
>
> All,
>
> The thrust of this sly theological-ideological ruse of "biblical
> Hebrew" being a "dead language" is transparent. For If it so, then
> Isaac Fried and millions of people like him who are spending their
> lives studying the Hebrew bible, thinking that they understand what
> they are reading, are in fact in grave denial. All these years they
> were riding a dead horse and getting nowhere. They were thinking they
> were making progress, but it was only the wind blowing in their
> ears.  Indeed: "In the study of a dead language we can never draw a
> conclusion and believe that this is the final word, this is the
> truth". THIS IS THE TRUTH! Moreover, "We never reach a final stage in
> the study of a dead language." Harken writers on living languages,
> you are wasting your time, FINAL STAGE is nearly come.
>
> I am really alarmed. All those years I approached "a dead language
> without a linguistic theory and several assumptions, for example,
> that the dead language behaved in a way similar to living languages."
> And, of course, "Any approach to the verbal system of a dead language
> must entail subjective judgements". And, of course, "No
> interpretation (INTERPRETATION!) of a dead language is final, there
> certainly are alternative interpretations. The good advice to the
> student is to look at the methodologies behind the interpretations."
>
> But what if the (arbitrary) assumption "that the dead language
> behaved in a way similar to living languages" is wrong, and said
> methodologies futile?! By the way, is JAE (Jane Austen English)
> likewise a dead language?
>
> Also, dear members, don't forget that this study "requires a
> knowledge of the minds of dead prophets." But what about the minds, I
> may ask, of living prophets, such as that of our dear neighbor Mr.
> Golem?
>
> But there is a ray hope shining out of the north (KI MI-TZAFON
> TIPATAX HA-TOVA). A certain Rolf Furuli, lecturer of Semitic
> languages at the university of Oslo, devised (one of?) "different
> approaches"  by the aid of which "we can try to come as close [to]
> [the?] the correct understanding as possible" of a sacred book
> written, alas, in a "dead language". THE CORRECT UNDERSTANDING! Not
> entirely, "BH" being after all a "dead language", but we are still
> invited to TRY and "approach" the truth AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE!
>
> Mind you.
>
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
>
> On Mar 24, 2007, at 3:04 AM, Rolf Furuli wrote:
>
> > Dear Harold,
> >
> > In the study of a dead language we can never draw a conclusion and
> > believe
> > that this is the final word, this is the truth. But by the use of
> > different
> > approaches we can try to come as close the the correct
> > understanding as
> > possible. I have also applied my model to New Testament Greek,
> > although I
> > have not yet analysed all the verbs of the NT. You are correct in  
> your
> > observations that the aorist may have non-pastreference - it can
> > even has
> > future reference (e.g., Jude 1:14). My  conclusion so far is that
> > past tense
> > is not a  part of the aorist, but it represents the perfective
> > aspect. I
> > take the imperfect as as past tense + the imperfective aspect,
> > present as
> > the imperfective aspect, and future as future tense.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > .
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Harold Holmyard" <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>
> > To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 1:02 AM
> > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Question for Rolf on the JW outlook on the
> > Hebrew
> >
> >
> >> Dear Rolf,
> >>>
> >>> When I ask the question: "Is past tense an uncancelable part of  
> the
> >>> WAYYIQTOL form?," I seek a scrupulous distinction between
> >>> semantics and
> >>> pragmatics when I answer the question, and I use "scrupulous" as
> >>> defined
> >>> by
> >>> Websters.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> HH: What you are seeking for seems unrealistic. An essential idea
> >> of the
> >> Greek aorist is that it is a preterite; it expresses past meaning.
> >> But
> >> that is not always the case. Sometimes the aorist can be used in
> >> contexts which indicate a present meaning. And it can be used in
> >> contexts which imply a future meaning. I was just reading about it:
> >>
> >> http://books.google.com/books?id=BExv_MTYrZkC&dq=uses+of+aorist
> >>  
> +Greek&pg=PA22&ots=gXedHFoi0S&sig=Xpoo7X4iOYetqTTFLw0tPx4R2u0&prev=ht
> >> tp://www.google.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Duses%2Bof%2Baorist%
> >> 2BGreek%26btnG%3DGoogle%
> >> 2BSearch&sa=X&oi=print&ct=result&cd=2#PPA16-IA4,M1
> >>
> >>
> >> Language is not as rigid as you seem to propose.
> >
> > RF
> > I think you misunderstand my position here.
> >
> >>
> >> Yours,
> >> Harold Holmyard
> >> _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Rolf Furuli
> > University of Oslo
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew