Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Kevin Riley" <klriley AT alphalink.com.au>]

But if you base it on 'living informants', does that not make any form of
any language from 100 or more years ago a 'dead language'?  You can't avoid
the decision of when a form of the language (say Old English) has become
another form (like Middle English).  How much does a language have to change
before it is no longer the same language?  Is Mosaic Hebrew (if we can agree
on which biblical passages contain this form) the same language as C8th BCE
Hebrew?  Is Classical Hebrew the 'same' language as Mishnaic Hebrew, or are
both the 'same' language as Modern Hebrew?  Can we find a living informant
to assure us that any verbal form of C19th English is the same as today?
Would we be comfortable referring to Victorian English as a 'dead' language?
Do those who claim to understand the KJV perfectly count as informants to
avoid classing Elizabethan English as a 'dead' language?  Biblical Hebrew is
not alone in being questionable about falling into the category of 'dead
language'.  Classical Greek, Latin and Arabic also can be argued to be not
'dead' because they have always been in use in some way.

You are right that the definition of 'dead language' is important.  So is
the definition of 'dialect' vs 'language'.  And I think we have an equal
likelihood of reaching a conclusion acceptable to all.  But perhaps each
time we cover the ground we come closer to narrowing our definition?  Maybe
that is worthwhile.  I am not sure the question of whether there is a 'best
way' to study any language, or what it is if there is one, is likely to be
solved.

Kevin Riley

> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:b-hebrew-
> bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Justiss
> 
> Would the discussion of whether or not Hebrew is a dead language be served
by
> introducing the category of "living informant" to the discussion.  Since
biblical
> Hebrew has no living informants, e.g. Moses or David, whom we could ask
about
> the syntactical function of clause initial Yiqtols in narrative and speech
and poetry,
> shouldn't we consider it dead--that is, in the sense of no living
informants?
> 
> 
> 
> This discussion is important because it bears directly on how the language
should
> be studied properly.
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Justiss
>