Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Dave Washburn wrote:

>> This regards Dave's earlier comment:
>> "I believe it was William Chomsky who said that modern Hebrew
>> has more in common with Indo-European languages than it does
>> with any Semitic language, including ancient Hebrew."
>>
>> Ghilad Zuckerman quotes Chomsky to the effect that Hebrew
>> never died: http://yiddish.haifa.ac.il/tmr/tmr09/tmr09013.htm
>> (quoting Chomsky's 1957 "Hebrew: The Eternal Language").
>> This statement of Chomsky goes at odds with the above
>> position.  Since Zuckerman's research is focused on this very
>> idea, I would have expected Zuckerman to mention it if
>> Chomsky in fact supported his position.
>>
>> Regarding the comment itself, how would you prove (or disprove)
>> such a statement?  What is "more" and what is "less" and what
>> constitutes "common ground" with Indo European rather than
>> Semitic?
>
> In context I believe he was speaking of grammar, and especially the way the 
> modern
> Hebrew verb system is tensed, among other factors.

Hi, it would be interesting to see the original quote.  All I said is that
off-hand it just seems not to "add up" that Chomsky made a comment
of that sort if Zuckerman, whose position is that Hebrew is a hybrid
language of mixed European and Semitic portions only quotes Chomsky
in a way that suggests Chomsky sees Hebrew as a pure language
that "never died" (rather than as a European language in Semitic garb).

> So, does that mean you don't intend to answer my question?

I do not accept the basic premise that modern Hebrew several generations
ago has more in common with European than with Semitic languages, at
least not until those terms are properly defined and explained.  That is, how
do you quantify ("more" vs "less") Europeanness vs Semiticness, how do
you decide whether something is Semitic or European?  Without these
defined, the statement cannot be substantiated, nor can we compare
modern Hebrew today vs modern Hebrew several generations ago.
Compare the issue of the Imperial Aramaic with its Old Persian influence
on the verbal system.  Does that mean that Imperial Aramaic is more
European than it is Semitic?

Yitzhak Sapir