Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Bryant,

You may want to look at my book The Analytic and Synthetic Etymology  
of the Hebrew Language, which is found in its entirety at my website  
www.hebrewetymology.com It is an etymological dictionary analyzing  
all Hebrew roots extant as to their elementary constituents. Every  
cited BH word is parsed for its radicals and the identity markers, or  
personal pronouns, it contains.

Isaac Fried, Boston University


On Nov 29, 2007, at 1:08 AM, Bryant J. Williams III wrote:

> 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!