Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Kimmo:

I didn’t participate, but for a different reason—it is off topic for this
list. You are asking questions that would be of interest for Second Temple
and New Testiment studies, but the last of Biblical Hebrew was written in
late fifth century BC and even then it showed signs that it was not natively
spoken.

I can see a possible use in such a study if it shows how much later use of
Hebrew conformed to Aramaic and later Greek and Latin use away from
pre-Babylonian Exile use, and how that influences how we understand Biblical
Hebrew today.

As far as Greek and Latin influences, archaeology apparently shows us that
they started already during the Second Temple period.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Kimmo Huovila
<kimmo.huovila AT kolumbus.fi>wrote:

> I hope this is not too off-topic for the list.
>
> One of the most interesting (to me) threads over the last year has been
> Randall Buth and Jack Kilmon's debate on the status of Hebrew and Aramaic
> around 1st and 2nd centuries CE. At the time I was unable to participate,
> but
> if I may reopen (and somewhat broaden) the question, I would be very
> interested in how they see the sociolinguistic situation and its
> development
> in the second temple period and some time beyond (say 5th century BCE to
> 3rd
> century CE) in Israel. Who and in what situations would use the following
> languages:
> - High Hebrew
> - Low Hebrew
> - Aramaic
> - Greek
> - Latin
> (I am not sure if Jack Kilmon makes a distinction between high Hebrew and
> low
> Hebrew as Randall Buth does).
>
> Contributions also from other list members is, of course, welcome.
>
> Kimmo Huovila