Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] verb forms - Isaiah 56:6-7 was dying you shall die

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>
  • To: george.athas AT moore.edu.au
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] verb forms - Isaiah 56:6-7 was dying you shall die
  • Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:50:13 -0400

George,

I tend to agree with you that what I am saying about the structure of the Hebrew word is, as you gently put it, "novel" and "not supported by any other study", but I find nothing inherently wrong with this. Not that I dare compare myself to him, but Albert Einstein's theory of relativity also came out of the blue, unsupported by any other previous study.

Hebrew grammar as we know it is handed down to us practically unchanged straight from the Middle Ages. It is as R. D. QIMXI (1160-1235) conceived it by the methodology of the enlightened Arab grammarians of of his era. It is time to give it a new scientifically unbiased reconsideration.

One of the hurdles I am facing is that Linguistics (even Physics) is not mathematics. If called to task, I could provide a decisive proof to Pythagoras' theorem in under 7 minutes, but will be at great loss to prove the atomic theory of matter, or even explain why it is "true". There is another fundamental difference between the natural sciences and Linguistics. Whereas Physics contends with studying the infinity of God's limitlessly complex creation, from the endlessly micro-microscopic to the endlessly macro-macroscopic, Linguistics is relegated to the study of a mere man-made device. Language was created by utterly "primitive" people, and was developed by consensus by still utterly simple minded, yet supremely practical, people (unless you believe in its divine origin). Language must be, at its core, something very very simple. If somebody starts to strut about with a puffed-up linguistic or grammatical vocabulary you can be sure that he is on the wrong track.

I know that my chances of making quick "inroads" into the Linguistic mainstream are slim. There is no magic proof to what I say---I don't have a magic staff to fling down that will turn into a snake. What I say about the inner structure of the Hebrew language is the result, though, of many years of assiduously and thoughtfully (I hope) digging into the innards of the language. The conclusions I reached are to my utter satisfaction. The theory I propose appears to me to logically, comprehensively, cogently, and simply, explain every aspect of the Hebrew language. The "solid evidence" you are talking about is in the pudding---you taste it and you will see that it is good. I am serious, but the deal is this: I propose the theory, you provide the proof. It works both ways, people may not agree with me, but I have never encountered a credible refutation.

Otherwise, I have piled all my rambling thoughts (up to 2004) into my book: "ha-etimologyah ha-analitit ve-ha-sintetit shel ha-lashon ha- Ivrit" (1116 pages, English introduction, bible paper, soft cover, sold new, at cost, for $18 at Amazon.com).

Meanwhile I indulge in listing on b-hebrew, reading interesting and ingenious posts, and showing from time to time how my own way of thinking smoothly tackles any Hebrew word. It will take time, but eventually I will find converts. Ultimately, as is often the case in science, somebody important will catch up on it, will claim that it is, of course, all very simple (and he is actually, of course, very right), and that he knew it all along. He will make a name for himself (the second Gesenius!) and poor IF will be forgotten.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Apr 17, 2007, at 3:42 AM, George Athas wrote:

As I've mentioned before, Isaac, your view of Hebrew as outlined in your
email is rather novel. It is not supported by any other study, as far as I
am aware. To make some inroads in the field you're going to have to provide
some solid evidence for your theories. Uri's response highlights one area
for consideration: cognate analysis.


Best Regards,

GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney)
1 King St, Newtown, NSW 2042, Australia
Ph: (+61 2) 9577 9774
[cut]
_________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page