Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>]

Dear Isaac,

[Isaac]
I have said it often and very clearly before, and I will say it again:  Every 
U
and I in a Hebrew word is a universal identity marker [aka personal pronoun],
invariably. There is no such thing in Hebrew as a "vowel", except for A. The
idea of the vowel is an alien carry-over into Hebrew from Indo-European
grammar.

[Bryant]
You may or may not be correct, but please prove the above assertion with
documentation, sources, examples, etc.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Isaac Fried" <if AT math.bu.edu>
To: "David Kummerow" <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:56 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 31: 47 - Suffix -UT


> David,
>
> You have said
>
> "Actually, I said, and have said, a lot more than that."
>
> I know. I would greatly prefer, though, to stay focused on one thing
> at a time.
>
> I have said it often and very clearly before, and I will say it again:
>
> Every U and I in a Hebrew word is a universal identity marker [aka
> personal pronoun], invariably.
>
> There is no such thing in Hebrew as a "vowel", except for A. The idea
> of the vowel is an alien carry-over into Hebrew from Indo-European
> grammar.
>
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
> On Nov 29, 2007, at 12:06 AM, David Kummerow wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi Isaac,
> >
> > Actually, I said, and have said, a lot more than that.
> >
> > Your failure to address such foundational issues as raised is
> > telling. As I said before, I will no longer waste my time
> > responding unless you choose to address mine and others' arguments.
> > I have better things to do than interact with nonsense ideas having
> > no linguistic basis.
> >
> > Regards,
> > David Kummerow.
> >
> >
> >> David, You are saying
> >> "Isaac, whenever I see a 'u' and an 'i' I see a vowel -- not
> >> necessary a person-number-gender (PNG) inflection. I don't know
> >> why you say I see it when I don't, esp. when I keep pointing out
> >> that this is so."
> >> Of course you see --- God blessed you with eyesight. But you fail,
> >> I am afraid, to understand what you are seeing. The rest is a
> >> corollary to the above.
> >> Isaac Fried, Boston University
> >> On Nov 28, 2007, at 10:48 PM, David Kummerow wrote:
> >>> Hi Isaac,
> >>>
> >>> See comments below:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> David,
> >>>> Whenever you look at an U and an I [also O and E] in a Hebrew
> >>>> word you see a universal identity marker [also known as a
> >>>> personal pronoun], invariably.
> >>>
> >>> Isaac, whenever I see a 'u' and an 'i' I see a vowel -- not
> >>> necessary a person-number-gender (PNG) inflection. I don't know
> >>> why you say I see it when I don't, esp. when I keep pointing out
> >>> that this is so.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If T is not radical, then it is a personal pronoun,
> >>>> invariably. I have said this repeatedly on this list [also, of
> >>>> course, in my book, which can be seen in its entirety at
> >>>> www.hebrewetymology.com <http://www.hebrewetymology.com>].
> >>>
> >>> That is simply false and this type of mistake lies at the very
> >>> heart of your erroneous methodology. /t/ as a phoneme in BH is
> >>> open to be used: 1) within the 'root' for any given word; 2)
> >>> within the paradigm of independent personal pronouns; 3) as
> >>> verbal and nominal marking of PNG; and 4) within any other
> >>> morpheme with various functions, eg -ut. So basically anywhere.
> >>> It seems to me you do not understand what phonemic status
> >>> entails. /t/ as a phoneme is not constrained to equate solely to
> >>> either a 'root' letter or a marker of PNG. The fact that you
> >>> insist this is so is a mystery to me. You attempt some sort of
> >>> advanced linguistic analysis of Hebrew, yet you seem to not have
> >>> a sufficient grasp of foundational linguistic methodology.
> >>>
> >>>> It is for illustrative purposes only that I specifically read -
> >>>> U- as HU), and -I- as HI). Consider the example of $-U-LAX, $AL-
> >>>> U-AX, and $ALX-U, of the root $LX, 'send'. Even though the
> >>>> latter means 'THEY have sent' I permit myself to read it as $ALX-
> >>>> HU) by virtue of the universality of U.
> >>>
> >>> There is no sense to 'illustrative purposes' if it is just plain
> >>> wrong. In any case, there is nothing 'universal' about 'u'. As a
> >>> vowel, it is not constrained for use simply as a marker of PNG.
> >>> The phonemic status of /u/ dictates that this is so. It is
> >>> secondary to this that this vowel is used in some situations as a
> >>> marker of PNG. Moreover, I think $-U-LAX and $AL-U-AX are
> >>> figments of your imagination: they form no part of the paradigm
> >>> for $LX. You see PNG marking where morphemes semantically
> >>> indicate something entirely different -- but now in this case
> >>> you're even adding vowels in for extra pronouns! Once you begin
> >>> to operate with the methodology you do, it seems there's no end
> >>> to how many pronouns you can 'find'!
> >>>
> >>>> I am preparing now a reply to Kenneth Greifer in which I will
> >>>> elaborate on this in some greater detail. Isaac Fried, Boston
> >>>> University
> >>>
> >>> I wish you wouldn't. We all know what you think, and since it has
> >>> no basis in reality it is better you kept your views to yourself
> >>> to save tiring the list with any more of this.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> David Kummerow.
> >>>
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> For your security this Message has been checked for Viruses as a courtesy of
Com-Pair Services!
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.9/1157 - Release Date: 11/28/07
12:29 PM
>
>


For your security this Message has been checked for Viruses as a courtesy of 
Com-Pair Services!