Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Blau's explanation for how ultimate stress became inHebrew

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] Blau's explanation for how ultimate stress became inHebrew
  • Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 14:01:35 +0200

Dear list-members,

I agree with Barry that in order to develop a balanced and well-founded view of some ancient linguistic matter, one must have a good knowledge of what different scholars have written about the subject. I also agree with James Spinti that because of Blau's excellent scholarship we should give a careful consideration to his conclusions.

But we must remember that Classical Hebrew grammar and phonology, as we understand them today, are based on induction and indirect evidence and includes a lot of scholarly guesswork. We also see a clear tendency in monographs, textbooks, and reference works discussing ancient phonology, grammar, and lexical semantics to repeat what others have said without checking their conclusions thoroughly.

I will give one example that deals with ancient Greek , but which clearly is relevant for Classical Hebrew studies as well.

In 2010 Gunnar Samuelsson published his dissertation "Crucifixion in Antiquity." The author has done an extensive research (413 pages), and his conclusion, which I heartily endorse, is that much of what is said in textbooks and reference works about the basic words used for "cross; crucifixion" is without any foundation. On the back cover the author points out that almost all accounts from antiquity that scholars have used to prove crucifixion must be rejected; at the best, some of them are ambiguous. Then he says:

"The New Testament is not spared from this terminological ambiguity. The accounts of the death of Jesus are strikingly sparse. Their chief contribution is usage of the unclear terminology in question. Over-interpretation, and probably even pure imagination, have afflicted nearly every wordbook and dictionary that deals with the terms related to to crucifixion as well as scholarly depictions of what happened at Calvary. The immense knowledge of the punishment of crucifixion in general and the execution of Jesus in particular, cannot be supported by the studied texts."

We have exactly the same situation in connection with many ancient Hebrew issues. So we should carefully study the conclusions of the leading scholars, but be skeptical regarding their conclusions.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo






----- Original Message ----- From: Isaac Fried
To: Barry
Cc: b-hebrew
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Blau's explanation for how ultimate stress became inHebrew

I don't know and it irrelevant to me.

Ok, thanks. In my own academic training, I was taught that some knowledge of the published writings in a given area was essential to my own work, so I find this lack of knowledge... surprising. You must be operating on different principles.

N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Classics and Bible Instructor, TAA
http://www.theamericanacademy.net
(2010 Savatori Excellence in Education Winner)
Mentor, TNARS
http://www.tnars.net





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page