Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Language modelling

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Language modelling
  • Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:57:33 +0100

Dear list-members,

I do not want to take part in this discussion, because we know so little with certainty about the languages of the past. For example, "Proto-Semitic" is a linguistic stage that is assumed to have existed, but we know absolutely nothing about it, and we would not loose anything if we discarded the concept altogether. When I teach Akkadian, I teach my students the traditional phonological viewpoints, and I use the sign values found in Labat. But at the same time I tell them that this is not the final truth, and that several traditional viewpoints regarding Akkadian-for example the explanations of the verbal system,and the value of the syllables-can be challenged. I teach the students that a true scientific approach is to accept that the traditional grammars are the best we have at present. But at the same time they should keep in mind that grammars of ancient languages are based on induction, and because of the Problem of Induction, they may contain many errors. Thus, I view an appeal to "150 years of phonological work" as a dogmatic statement.

The basic reason for writing this post is Barry's personal attack on James. We should treat each other in a civil way as colleagues. We should never accuse a list-member of having a particular agenda-because we cannot know that. As a matter of fact, ancient history, chronology, and linguistics cannot be proven in the philosophical sense of the word. Claims that science has *proved* this or that regarding the past (or even often regarding the present) are hopelessly native. In relation to finds and data from the ancient past, each of us serve as a jury. Proofs are lacking, so our duty is to make a judgment regarding the circumstantial evidence that exist. If one judge this evidence differently from us, we should not doubt his or her motives.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli Ph.D
University of Oslo



--------------------------------------------------
From: "Randall Buth" <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 2:26 AM
To: "James Christian" <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>
Cc: "Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Reflection on Randall's Statement

Well, that means that we who recognize three Akkadian vowels I, A, U (and
E +/O)
are sitting with the whole field of Semitic studies and 150 years of
phonological
work. And we/they have recognized that the evidence is compelling.
And you are sitting alone trying to believe that any voice from the street
has
equal weight by saying "I don't/can't see evidence". It's not our
fault or responsibility.
As Sapir said, "It is amazing how far you'd go to simply refuse to
even read evidence
against your position."
And the evidence is massive and far beyond the practical constraints
of a public
email list. We can summarize for someone, but that person must have a
desire
to learn.

This reminds me of an experience as a college freshman, taking, of all
things, an a "history of political science" course, in which the instructor
(whom I remember as one of the the best professors I ever had outside of my
major) taught using classic texts, starting with Aristotle's Politics.
There was a group of "agenda" students in the class -- chances are if if any
one has been around a university long enough for any reason you have
encountered the like -- who absolutely insisted that we couldn't know what
Aristotle really wrote because we couldn't be sure that the knowledge of
ancient Greek had been accurately preserved. No amount of evidence would
convince them otherwise, and they would have gone on incessantly had the
professor finally not told them (politely) to shut up and not bring up the
issue again.

That's what I think James is -- an agenda student, and he sure has been
successful in diverting lots of list energy to considering that agenda. If
he really thinks he has something, let him interact with the range of
published literature and publish his thesis, and see how that fares. In the
meantime, maybe the list could discuss issues related to biblical Hebrew as
a language, rather than spelling and historical linguistics?

N.E. Barry Hofstetter

Fecisti nos ad te et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in te...
-- Augustine, Confessions 1:1







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page