Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Early Biblical Hebrew (EBH or SBH - Standard) & Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Early Biblical Hebrew (EBH or SBH - Standard) & Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH)
  • Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 09:44:12 -0700 (PDT)

   Some would argue that before judging, even conditionaly,
  conclusions of a specific paper, it is better to read it.

   As for your general point, how about using the terms
'earlier' and 'later' instead of 'dating'?

  Incidentally, among Richard Hess' many important works
are those dealing with various historical aspects of certain
PNs and toponyms in early Israel biblical texts.

 
   Uri Hurwitz                                  Great Neck, NY


 

   


I must admit that I have not read Andersen & Hess, but the conclusion strikes
me as open to the charge of circular reasoning. On what do they base their
dating of the texts? I think for their conclusion to stand, they would need
to establish the date of the texts by non-linguistic means. Otherwise, they
are using linguistic means to date a text, and then using that date of the
text to confirm the linguistics. If this is what Andersen & Hess in fact
argue, then they are open to the very charge that Young, Rezetko, and
Ehrensvärd make of much scholarship, namely that dating texts on the basis of
linguistics and then using the linguistics to date texts is completely
circular. Ergo, we need to find non-linguistic means of dating biblical texts.


GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au













Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page