Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Ed Walkwitz <edwalkwitz AT yahoo.com>]

Randall and Jim,
 
Thanks for your thoughts.
 
Randall: Thanks for your tip on Donald Wiseman. I'll try to get to the only 
library I know of here in Des Moines that would have that and look it up. 
Unfortunately, that may be a week or two. In the mean time, could I ask a 
couple 
follow-ups?
Even if one supposes that Gen. 10 is about political relationships at the 
time 
of Abraham, doesn't Gen. 9 make it clear that the curse on Canaan was based 
on 
the fact that Canaan was Ham's actual son? Wouldn't that make the Canaanites 
ethnically non-semitic? As to who the Canaanites learned their semitic 
language 
from, maybe that's lost in history. But I'm sure we agree it happens a lot. 
You 
pointed out it happened to the Philistines.
 
In any case, it sounds like you agree that Abraham spoke Aramaic, and 
switched 
to Canaanite?
 
Other points you made: the post-exilic prophets wrote in Hebrew. Excellent 
point; strange I hadn't thot about that; it reminds me of Watson's reaction 
when 
Sherlock points out something obvious that Watson hadn't thot of. But it 
seems 
everyone does claim the post-exilic Jews spoke Aramaic, or else the Targums 
would have been unnecessary. Are you saying they actually spoke Hebrew? In 
Nehemiah, I'm assuming the language of Judah was Aramaic, and the languages 
of 
Ashdod, Moab, and Ammon (13:23-24) had diverged sufficiently from Hebrew by 
that 
time. I know you've studied this a lot more than I have. If the Jews spoke 
Hebrew at that time, I guess my main question would be, how do we explain the 
evidence for the Jews speaking Aramaic at the time of Jesus, such as the 
Targums?
 
Jim: Thanks also for your thots. I'm assuming that Moses wrote Genesis in 
Hebrew, his language at the time, and he translated anything said in a 
different 
language into Hebrew, like the gospel writers translated Jesus Aramaic words 
into Greek, though still introducing his quotes as, "he said..." Laban's 
naming 
of the witness heap would be one exception that Moses decided to preserve, 
like 
the gospel writer preserving Jesus' words, "Talatha koum" (sp?). As for 
names, 
two possibilities: 1) they were adapted to "pure Hebrew", as happens all the 
time in languages, or, 2) Abram took a new "local" name. I've immigrants to 
the 
USA who have done that.
 
I can't see in the text that Abraham went from Canaan to Ur. It is worded 
pretty 
clearly the other way around.
 
Thanks. Ed Walkwitz, Des Moines, Iowa




________________________________
From: "JimStinehart AT aol.com" <JimStinehart AT aol.com>
To: randallbuth AT gmail.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 8:49:13 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Aramaic to Hebrew language switch?


Randall Buth:

1.  You wrote:  “Jim, I'm in a fun moode.  Lapis lazuli. Cool stuff.”

Genesis 12: 5 refers to KL RKW$M that Abraham and Lot brought with them 
from Harran to Canaan.  That phrase could well include lapis lazuli, because 
the shortened form RK$ of that same word is used on four occasions in chapter 
14 of Genesis to refer to “loot”, that is, valuable items of the ruling 
class.  Genesis 14: 11 refers to the KL RK$ of SDM, and Genesis 14: 16 refers 
to KL H-RK$, being “all the loot” that was first taken from SDM by the four 
attacking rulers, and then returned to SDM by Abraham.  The provincial city 
of Ur was still the premier place in the world to buy lapis lazuli in 
Kassite Babylonia.  Indeed, there would be no reason to go to Ur except to 
buy 
lapis lazuli at wholesale.  Finally, selling that lapis lazuli to Pharaoh was 
what brought considerable wealth to Abraham and Lot and their people.

2.  You wrote:  “Meanwhile, while on the theme of the perfect
batqol-Hebrew of Gen 12, I love the use of the pure volitional 'be a 
blessing' for a future promise.  that's quite effective, and I end on that 
serious 

note.”

It should be no surprise that Abraham’s first meeting with YHWH features 
perfect Hebrew, as that was Abraham’s native language.  Note that there are 
no 
language issues when Abraham converses with Canaanites in Canaan.  Note 
also that chapter 14 of Genesis, the oldest part of the Bible, features 
perfect 
Hebrew, composed by an early Hebrew, once again indicating that the first 
Hebrews were native speakers of Hebrew, not immigrants from southern 
Mesopotamia who had picked up Hebrew in Canaan on the fly as a second 
language.  
No 

way!

3.  But you didn’t answer any of the three questions we asked you:

(a)  Do you agree that Biblical Hebrew is a virgin pure west Semitic 
language?  In my view, the language itself is telling us that the Hebrews are 
indigenous to Canaan -- a west Semitic-speaking locale.

(b)  Is Terakh/TRX a west Semitic name, based at least in part on the verb 
TRX in Ugaritic?  If so, that would not square with a claim that the text 
allegedly portrays Terakh and his ancestors as hailing from southern Mesopot
amia somewhere near Ur.

(c)  Is Abram/)B-RM the most perfect Hebrew name imaginable, meaning “(the 
divine) Father is exalted”?  If so, that is once again thoroughly 
inconsistent with the traditional and scholarly view that the text allegedly 
portrays 

Abraham as having been born near Ur in southern Mesopotamia, a locale where 
west Semitic was not a prominent language.  There’s no TRX or )BRM in 
Akkadian from southern Babylonia, but both names make perfect sense in west 
Semitic.  Although TRX exists as a noun in Aramaic, it makes no sense in 
relation 

to Abraham’s father, as opposed to the verb TRX in Ugaritic.  [The name )BRM 
would probably work in Aramaic.] 

You know Biblical Hebrew very well, so all of these language issues should 
be quite obvious to you.  Yet I never see these particular language issues 
being raised in the scholarly commentaries on the Patriarchal narratives.  
Scholars continue to repeat the non-scholarly traditional view that the text 
allegedly portrays the Hebrews as originating in southern Mesopotamia near 
Ur, with scholars sometimes adding that the Hebrews did not in fact originate 
near Ur so the text is fiction.  Based on language issues alone, the better 
view is that Abraham is portrayed in the text as being indigenous to Canaan, 
and he went on a one-time caravan trip way out east to Ur to buy lapis 
lazuli as commercial merchandise.  If I am misunderstanding or 
misrepresenting 
the language issues here, many of us would learn from your analysis of such 
language issues. 

4.  It would also be nice if you would compare Khuburu/XBR as Ugaritic King 
Keret’s mythical kingdom to the XBRWN of the Patriarchs, including 
explaining the presence of the vav/W in the Biblical text.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

>From randallbuth AT gmail.com  Fri Aug 27 17:18:18 2010
Return-Path: <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 4085C4C026; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:18:18 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
        DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=disabled
        version=3.3.1
Received: from mail-vw0-f49.google.com (mail-vw0-f49.google.com
        [209.85.212.49])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3E544C018
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:18:13 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11so3712925vws.36
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:18:13 -0700 
(PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to
        :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=qCtwbVqB3emLY5DmikiVPXi3z/kV8TFWHRrk9B3gdXU=;
        b=p+V36eNGSsIco8E7gKqxAp/fqTBP+wpQOyDGWF7XWltn+Kpn7z8WsEwr3jhxQF5vuq
        SmCUmEnGc+VvfuCMzQgcUK8spvQJorkOZx/+DWEFx89oIyNLYR6FbswaBRmlwwClx5ss
        haXZvXjEiXZ49qVC7SeUh4tOeO3kRNyX2qX08DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; 
c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
        :cc:content-type;
        b=ramjDYSFKHgDz4uqynv4yzAoWGdGkFCi7BGTZ77/OMdsE3pLGlz32IBtsQUtEtnVTM
        8oyodOEOTKha7SERsX17PweuO254xv0LMXPZP5L0Pva1KmjADy2dodIpRTGAV17CLlk+
        yAyWfJDoPhM8dDC6NiuD86ZE9SPbbRnbhX0xYMIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.75.200 with SMTP id z8mr904378vcj.197.1282943893611; Fri,
        27 Aug 2010 14:18:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.175.136 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:18:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <616445.53202.qm AT web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <11e7d.6ddcc5be.39a92a69 AT aol.com>
        <616445.53202.qm AT web65601.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 00:18:13 +0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTim8H+56WCYmo61Tf3KF7+xR-sJ3w+mZZYQTVnCY AT mail.gmail.com>
From: Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
To: Ed Walkwitz <edwalkwitz AT yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Aramaic to Hebrew language switch?
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 21:18:18 -0000

> Other points you made: the post-exilic prophets wrote in Hebrew. Excellent
> point; strange I hadn't thot about that; it reminds me of Watson's reaction
> when Sherlock points out something obvious that Watson hadn't thot of. But
> it seems everyone does claim the post-exilic Jews spoke Aramaic, or else the
> Targums would have been unnecessary. Are you saying they actually spoke
> Hebrew? In Nehemiah, I'm assuming the language of Judah was Aramaic,

what targums? The only first century targum that I'm sure of is "Job".
It appears to have come from the East and was widely quoted. LXX Job
42:17ff, two rabbi stories about it with Gamaliel, two copies of it at
Qumran. Onkelos was late
2nd century CE, the Palestinian probably a bit later. By 'everyone'
you are excluding the Israeli scholars who specialize in Mishnaic
Hebrew.
Nehemiah wrote in Hebrew, and as mentioned, half of the children of
foreign wives did not speak Hebrew. So there was a lot of Aramaic, it
was the official language, but the tribal language was still Hebrew.
These are called 'bilingual' situations, something common in much of
the world, especially in Africa and
other 'two/thirds world'.

blessings
Randall



--
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth AT gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life