Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>]

Before I respond any further Yitshak could you tell me, in your own  
words, what you believe my position to be on this subject?

James Christian




Quoting Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>:

> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:39 PM, James Read wrote:
>
> > Of course, the reading of secondary sources can be useful it they reference
> > the primary sources well. Reading secondary sources that comment on primary
> > source evidence can help you understand the data relevant to the debate and
> > the various interpretations and help you form an opinion. The method of the
> > objective scientist is not to accept received wisdom but to put everything
> > to the test so as not to run the risk of making misguided conclusions based
> > on unfounded assumptions.
>
> James, how would you know if the secondary source references a primary source
> if you haven't read it?  The method of the objective scientist is not
> to discount
> a peer-reviewed scientific publication without reading it first, or at
> least without
> being familiar with the views of the author in general.
>
> > However, quoting secondary sources and the primary sources they quote is one
> > thing. Telling a person to go away and read a book is a bout as useful as me
> > replying 'go away and read Genesis' with no indication as to which part of
> > it I feel will help you better understand the issues being discussed.
>
> Maybe if you go look up the book you will find a chapter exactly
> relevant, or you
> will find the index useful.  Maybe your question is so basic that it requires
> reading whole books to understand the issues.  Maybe you are asking a
> question about grammar, and the person who responds knows it was dealt
> with in a grammar book but doesn't remember the exact page.
>
> > > In ancient times, languages were classified together based on
> > > historical relationships, and vice versa.  You can see this in the
> > > Table of Nations, where the two are essentially implied together.
>
> > Well, yes and no. It is not entirely clear that the author's intention was
> > to suggest families of languages in any way.
>
> I should point out that even in modern times (until Hetzron) Semitic
> languages were classified by geography.  (That is why we have such terms
> as East Semitic, West Semitic, Northwest Semitic, South Semitic).
>
> > Yes. Linguistics can be useful. But as with any approach you need to
> > recognise its limitations before you start making conclusions and presenting
> > them as an absolute truth.
>
> You are welcome to raise the limitations.
>
> > If in a few thousand years time somebody had no evidence other than a few
> > manuscripts from South America and North Africa he would conclude that the
> > South Americans came from Rome and that the North Africans all came from
> > Mecca.
>
> No, because no one said that language transfer means population transfer.
> That is an assumption you brought to the discussion.
>
> > Again, at first glance this might seem like a good method that provides
> > conclusive results. But that's more than a little naive. There are far too
> > many variables to make these kind of conclusions with any certainty.
>
> Like what?  Can you give a specific example from East Semitic languages
> (such as Eblaite and Akkadian) as opposed to West Semitic languages
> that substantiates your point?  To quote yourself, "Evidence?!?!?!?!?!!"
> Or to quote yourself a few lines down:
> > The main point at the end of the day is that we can only have any kind of
> > constructive and objective discussion by bringing the data to the fore.
>
> > This is why some people prefer to include in the consideration the things
> > written in the ancient sources.
> >
> > e.g. if in a few thousand years somebody reads an account about how the
> > Spanish collonised South America the researcher could decide to conclude
> > that the South Americans once had their own indigenous language and spoke a
> > Latin based dialect as a result of the colonisation.
>
> Again, linguists study languages.  Just because language crosses
> geographical distances does not mean that massive population
> transfer took place.
>
> > Assuming that something is true just because person X who you, for whatever
> > reason, choose to respect is not the kind of argument that is likely to
> > convince me. I think (hope) Karl will back me up in this stance.
>
> Sorry, James.  Sometimes when you ask a question people answer you with
> the best intentions, and it's not polite to snub their efforts.  You
> might try to
> figure out why we choose to respect someone.  What is his academic
> background.  If he did a dissertation on some topic in linguistics, for
> example, maybe he is worth listening to.  I don't mean accept what he says
> uncritically.  I mean, give him the credit to listen to what he   
> says.  Perhaps
> it is too long to quote or respond here on list.  Take some time, someone
> answered you, try to look up and see if it addresses your question.  The
> discussion will advance much better if you go off to read what he says and
> then come back and ask pertinent questions regarding his argument.
>
> Yitzhak Sapir
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.