Biblical Hebrew Forum

[fred burlingame <tensorpath AT gmail.com>]

Shalom Rivka:

1. I define "living language" as a language used by two or more people for
at least 70 percent of their exchanged and vocalized communications,
annually, and year in ... and year out.

2. I offer here an example of a language that appears alive, but remains
dead, under the definition I use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Mass

3. My limited position as to hebrew language follows.

4. Biblical hebrew language evolved into mishnaic hebrew language ("MH"). In
10 a.d., jerusalem and galilee, the lower, middle and upper class of hebrews
used MH ... as a living language. The vocabulary, knowledge and
speaking skill of the lower class differed from that of the religous
aristocracy ... then ... just as today.

5. The position of other posters here, as I understand it:

6. The hebrew language never died according to their different defintion of
"living." Aramaic language however, displaced MH in 10 a.d., as the means of
daily communication by and amongst the hebrews occupying judah and galilee
at that time.

7. I would consider hebrew language a dead language, if paragraph "6"
represented fact. I do not however, believe that paragraph "6" represents
fact.


regards,

fred burlingame




On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Yodan <yodan AT yodanco.com> wrote:

> Shalom!
>
>
>
> I apologize in advance for not reading all the recent posts on whether
> Hebrew is (has been) a live, dead, or resurrected from the dead language.
>
>
>
> Therefore, I'm not sure if anyone mentioned the book Ivrit Safa Meduberet
> ("Hebrew - A Spoken Language") by Shlomo Haramati, a professor at the
> Hebrew
> University. This slim, easy-read book, published in 2000, reviews the use
> of
> Hebrew throughout the generations and discusses/debunks the myth that
> Hebrew
> was a dead language that was "resurrected" by Ben-Yehuda.
>
>
>
> One of the points in this book is that while Ben-Yehuda's efforts and
> accomplishments in inventing new words and in making the daily use of
> Hebrew
> as a primary language are invaluable and are certainly acknowledged, it is
> incorrect to consider Hebrew a dead language.
>
>
>
> Because it is clear (to me and to many others) that today's Hebrew has
> evolved from Biblical Hebrew through the continued use of the language,
> much
> as modern English has evolved from old English etc., I don't see how we can
> say that Hebrew (or Biblical Hebrew) is a dead language. IMHO a "dead"
> language is one that, except for academic researchers, no one is using it
> in
> speaking, writing, teaching, prayer, singing, communicating, etc.
>
>
>
> If Fred, who insists on referring to Hebrew (Biblical Hebrew, I presume) as
> a dead language has not done so already, perhaps he'll kindly defined "dead
> language" for us. If he has done so, sorry I missed it (as I said, I didn't
> read each post on the topic - my apologies).
>
>
>
> Bevirkat Kol Tuv,
>
>
>
> Rivka Sherman-Gold
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>