Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>]

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 4:54 PM, James Christian wrote:

>> But did you read the rest of what I wrote?
>
> Yes!

Great!

>> It's really offensive to me when
>> people read only part of what I write.
>
> Why?

If I write something, especially in a discussion to you, it's because
I think it is relevant.  If you don't read it, it's like you leave the room
while I'm speaking, only coming back to voice your own position.

>> Specifically, did you follow up the links I gave Karl regarding the
>> orthography?
>
> No! Any reason why you think I should do?

Yes, they are relevant to this point that you are discussing with me.
In fact, I think some of the questions you just asked are answered in
those links!  (That's how I figured you might not have read them)
Not only that, you are asking questions about orthography without
reading up on the sources I gave regarding orthography -- questions
that are in part answered by those sources.  Why should I repeat what
a source I just gave said?  The reason I looked it up, searched it, and
posted a link, is exactly to answer those questions!  Then you
complain that because I don't repeat the information, I have an
attitude that makes my posts not worthwhile?

Here is another source, that deals with the variety of inscriptions
found: http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/tb/writing_millard.pdf

>> Anyway, I think and as I see it, everyone who is familiar with the
>> data set thinks
>> that the data set is not too small for some conclusions
>
> People's opinions are of little consequence to the matter. What empirical
> measure did you use to calculate the size of a suitable data set to make
> which conclusions?

What measure did you use?

>> -- such as that the
>> spelling of the Bible including the Pentateuch is no earlier than the
>> 6th century
>> BCE.  Also, the evidence is not just royal or official inscriptions.

> Please elaborate if this is truthfully and demonstrably the case.

See the link above.  Also, what libraries do you have access to?

>> > Further, I'm not sure I see how this relates to the dating of Ruth. You
>> > seem
>> > to be assuming that the consonantal order was considered holy from the
>> > word
>> > go such that no-one would ever dare add an explanatory note or use a
>> > more
>> > modern spelling when copying.

This is what you wrote.

>> Huh?  Did you read what I wrote about the dating of Ruth.  I suggest you
>> reread
>> that too.  It is short, and it is easy to find.  As you are using
>> gmail, it is near the
>> top of the thread, right after Yigal's post.

> Yes. You wrote that you believe it must have been pre Ezra because that is
> what your model of the change of Hebrew would predict. I agree that the
> original work was quite possibly pre Ezra but am not entirely sure we have
> the kind of data we would need to work this out in the way you are
> suggesting. However, what you have to say is definitely worth listening to
> and I'm interested in learning more about it.

I specifically dealt with copyists.  Even if someone copied the work, he must
have at least copied it before Ezra.

> However, I do have reservations about what conclusions can be made based on
> data from inscriptions. How indicative are Egyptian inscriptions of the way
> people wrote day to day?

I don't understand the question.

Yitzhak Sapir