Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Arnaud:

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Arnaud Fournet
<fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>wrote:

>
> From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
>
>>
>>
>> The terminology was developed to describe European languages and Biblical
>> Hebrew is not a European language. …
>>
>

> Karl W. Randolph.
>>
>>  ***
>
> There is a kind of hybris in thinking that a pluri-millenary tradition is
> incorrect and thoroughly inadequate and that you, alone, have the right
> approach.
> Actually the answer may be harder to hear than the question.
>
> Arnaud Fournet
>
> A pluri-millenary tradition for which language?

First, I was commenting on the terminology developed mostly during the last
two centuries, hardly pluri-millenary, to describe European languages and
that that terminology does not fit ancient, Biblical Hebrew.

Secondly, while I don’t know Mishnaic Hebrew and its later development, it
is my understanding from discussions on this list that its grammar is
significantly different from Biblical Hebrew. So were the medieval grammars
developed to describe Mishnaic Hebrew, or Biblical Hebrew? My understanding
is that they were developed for the former.

Thirdly, while I have seen only a little of Diethelm Michel’s († 1999) work,
so I don’t know the full extent of what he taught, yet my understanding of
how the qatal and yiqtol worked, which I came up independently of him, seems
to be similar to how he understood them. I read that there are others who
are continuing his teaching, mostly connected with the University of Mainz.
Therefore, I am not alone.

Karl W. Randolph.