Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Yitzhak:

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>wrote:

> Karl,
>
> … In this draft, only about 20% deals
> with the history of Hebrew, so the theory is not about the history
> of hebrew.  That is a side issue that comes up along the way.
> The main subject remains the linguistic classification of Canaanite
> languages.  Hebrew comes up because it is a Canaanite language.
>

With this explanation, I now realize I misunderstood you. You were talking
about your whole project, all I saw was the minor portion that dealt with
the history of Hebrew.

>
> When Yigal asked for linguistic evidence for the date of Ruth, I
> thought this pertains to it.  So I summarized parts of it that allowed
> me to give him an answer.  I noticed only Randall and I gave answers
> that were based on language.
>

Aaah … yah. I saw mainly the literary stylistic differences that indicate
early authorship. I figured that literary style is included in language
use.

>
> My theory does not pertain to the orthography.  The concepts I
> have discussed here about the orthography of Hebrew are well
> recognized by all scholars.
>

They are recognized, but not without their detractors.

>
> Karl, not everything that they teach in scholarship is a "first year
> lie."  It seems that you like to pin this label on everything you
> disagree with.  Well, the issue of orthography isn't a "first year
> lie."  Yes, there are variations.  But orthography was not invented
> only in the last few centuries.  Where did you get that idea?
>

Concerning orthography, i.e. one correct way to write and spell, is widely
recognized as a relatively new phenomenon, only within the last few
centuries. In some countries and languages, it still doesn’t exist.

As for “first year lies” (a phrase I to which I was introduced on this list,
I don’t remember who taught it to me), I was taught that Hebrew followed
certain grammar, syntax and spelling rules, and all the examples in the text
books followed those rules. Later, when I started reading Tanakh for myself,
cover to cover, I was in for a shock—those rules were often violated. I had
to learn a new set of rules to fit the data before my eyes.

My criticism in this particular example (not by any means for anything with
which I disagree) was that you seem to insist that Hebrew follow those rules
as taught in first year class, rather than how the language is actually used
in Tanakh.

>
> I'm also impressed with your willingness to accept that the
> Bible was accurately copied for thousands of years.  It is odd
> that in light of this you don't accept that the vocalization and
> cantillation was also accurately preserved.  I guess you have
> a more strict doctrine than the general Christian doctrine of
> the "inerrancy in the original autographs."  You believe that
> what we have is the original autographs!
>

This is a criticism of you that I have repeatedly leveled against you, that
you take a person’s statements, pervert them to something that the person
didn’t say, then use that distortion to attack that person. You have done
this so often. This is the straw man logical fallacy.

That you have done this so often speaks badly of you. Either you are a)
incompetent, unable accurately to assess what is written which, if true,
calls into question the accuracy of all of your scholarship, or b) a nasty
fellow, disagreeable to know personally, more pleasantly known only as
shimmering pixels on a screen.

I have repeated many times how I think the text was preserved, do I need to
repeat it again?

>
> You can read about gentilics in Gesenius:
> http://books.google.com/books?id=VSUUAAAAYAAJ
> No, it is not an imposition of western grammar into Hebrew.
>

Do you know where in the book the description is found? The book is a bunch
of scans, not text, so a quick search doesn’t find it.

>
> Having reviewed your mail I find that you provided no counter-
> evidence to the issue of orthography.  All you provided were
> hypothetical questions and insinuations.  Please provide
> any counter evidence you have.  Like you yourself said,
> "do you have examples to show us?"
>

For a specific example found also on the Siloam inscription, I looked for (L
R)$ [plural noun] and found Numbers 8:12, 1 Kings 7:17, 18, 19, 41, Jeremiah
23: 19, 30:23, Ezekiel 10:1, 2 Chronicles 3:16, 4:12 [twice]. With your
knowledge of computers and electronic texts, you should have been able to
find these.

>
> Yitzhak Sapir
>

As for access to libraries, the local library gives me access to JSTOR
articles online, which I can access through their website. I have to input
my library card number to prove I’m local to access the files.

In a nearby town there’s a fairly decent theological library, but the
transit fares to get there cost about the same as a week’s grocery bills and
I have to schedule at least six hours for the round trip including time to
study, that whatever I go there to look up must be really important. The
last time I was there the book I was looking for was missing. Yet there are
people on this list who would consider this a luxury, as their access to a
library is far more restricted. Therefore, it is only good manners that if
you cite a book, either to give where the citation is available on the web,
or otherwise provide for it to be viewed by others.

Karl W. Randolph.