Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Barry and Uri:

On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Barry H. <nebarry AT verizon.net> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: K Randolph
>
> >Ah Greek is a lot easier, especially if one limits himself to the New
> >Testament. For those of us who grew up speaking European languages (all of
> >us?), which would include modern Israeli Hebrew, we are on familiar ground
> >as far as the meanings are concerned, we have to learn only forms unique
> to
> >Greek.
>
> I don't limit myself to the NT, though I read the NTG every day.  A lot
> easier?  I think that's a highly subjective evaluation, and there's lots of
> tricky vocabulary in Greek (for one thing, there is a lot more vocabulary
> in
> Greek than there is for Hebrew).


That is a factor when one takes the whole of what is known of ancient Greek.
Modern knowledge of ancient Greek is much superior to that known of Biblical
Hebrew.

On the other hand, my reading of ancient Greek is 99% New Testament, and
that Greek not only has the familiarity of being a European language and
what that entails, but its vocabulary is far smaller than that of Tanakh:
both factors that make it easier to learn.


>  There are far less derivatives in English
> from Greek than from Latin, and true cognates have changed so much over the
> millenia that they usually are not intuitively helpful.
>

The example I like to give on this is the Greek word “mysterion” which meant
“revelation” that was given to adherents of a faith, a revelation that was a
“mystery” (English meaning) to those who did not receive that revelation.

>
> And Israeli Hebrew is a modern European language?  You sure about that?
>  You
> might want to check the history of the language.
>

What follows is why I made that statement, and how I see it differs from
Biblical Hebrew.

No, I don’t know modern Israeli Hebrew, however, I was taught its basic
grammar in preparation, which I never followed through, to learn it.

In all languages I have studied, I perceive no significant difference in how
they handle nouns, adjectives, pronouns, and so forth. The forms may differ,
but the actions that underlie the forms are virtually the same.

Word order within a sentence differs even between languages of the same
language family, so I don’t see that as a major factor to consider.

But that is not true of verbs.

Those who taught me the basics of modern Hebrew taught that its verbal
conjugations are tense based, the same as western European languages such as
English, German, Yiddish, etc. My limited experience of language learning
indicates that how languages handle their verbal conjugations makes up the
main differences between languages. In that modern Hebrew has the same
meanings behind the conjugations as do modern European languages makes it,
as far as I can tell, a modern European language (at least its grammar is).
If what I was taught is incorrect, I am open to correction.

Because Koiné Greek is a European language, the actions behind its
conjugations are familiar to European language speaking peoples.

I also studied Chinese, and its verbs have no conjugations (at least not
officially). Context indicates tense, aspect and mood.

Biblical Hebrew verbs have conjugations, but they indicate neither tense nor
aspect. Rather the main actions I can see behind Qatal and Yiqtol
conjugations are mood, and moods that are found in no other language I have
studied. For want of better terms, I call those two moods “primary” and
“secondary” moods, where each of those also stand for sub-moods that we
recognize such as nominative, optative, subjunctive and imperative. Tense
and aspect are indicated by context, just as in Chinese.

A good example illustrating this is Proverbs 31:10–31, where the context
indicates that this passage is present tense, imperfective aspect, where
most of the verbs are conjugated in a pattern where primary and secondary
moods are recognizable.

Hence, looking not at the forms but at the actions that underlie the forms,
I see the grammar of modern Israeli Hebrew to be a European language
grammar, very different from the grammar of Biblical Hebrew. That is why I
consider modern Israeli Hebrew to be a modern European language.

>
> N.E. Barry Hofstetter, semper melius Latine sonat...
> The American Academy
> http://www.theamericanacademy.net
> (2010 Salvatori Excellence in Education Winner)
>
> The North American Reformed Seminary
> http://www.tnars.net
>
> http://my.opera.com/barryhofstetter/blog
> http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry


My perception that modern Israeli Hebrew is a European language is based on
my way of thinking that elevates function over form. Those who recognize
form over function may not see the same patterns that I perceive, and it is
not my intention to denigrate them in any way. Rather we both work together
to master Biblical Hebrew.

Karl W. Randolph.