Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Randall:

First, the subject line is not entirely accurate, as I am dealing with
post-Babylonian Exile Biblical Hebrew, not Mishnaic Hebrew. Mishnaic Hebrew
comes in only as a development from post-Babylonian Exile Biblical Hebrew.

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Karl:
> >>> While I haven’t done an academic study on the subject, I have noticed
> >>> a pattern that I have also seen among children of immigrants who still
> >>> speak their parents’ languages. I noticed it among several language
> groups,
> >>> the same pattern, a simpler vocabulary and far less usage of figures of
> >>> speech. That, combined with the historical record, causes me to
> conclude
> >>> that those who moved to Judea under Cyrus no longer had native speaking
> >>> ability in Hebrew. And by extrapolation neither did those who lived
> later
> >>> as well.
> > >
> RB:
> ...
> >> I don't believe the evaluation of Hebrew and challenge it for evidence.
> >> Some of the postexilic books have as rich a vocabulary as preexilic.
>

Your refusal to indicate which Biblical writings you consider
post-Babylonian Exile makes me uncertain that we are dealing with the same
data set. If we are dealing with different data sets, then the comparison
is with apples with oranges, not apples with apples. I have already
indicated which writings I consider pre-Babylonian Exile and why.

>
> . . .
>
> RB:
> ...
> >> The challenge remains: please document the simpler vocabulary and lack
> of
> >> figures of speech in whatever you call 'Late Biblical Hebrew'.
>
> Karl:
> > You are asking for evidence of absence.
>
>
> First of all, that is incorrect. 'simpler' is not 'absence' it is a
> relationship.
>

“Simpler” is absence of complexity. If one wants to document simpler, one
must first document complexity. Then do statistical comparisons showing
less complexity.

If you want me to do that sort of statistical study, pay me. Seriously, put
money in the bank. I don’t have time to do it for free. Then I can put in
the hours needed to do that study properly.

>
> > In order to prove absence, one
> > needs to take months, if not years, analyzing sentence structure, syntax,
> > correlating statistical analysis of relative frequencies of writing, etc.
> > studying all pre-exilic writings comparing them to all post-exilic
> > writings. You haven’t done that to prove your disbelief in the pattern. I
> > haven’t done it to prove it.
>
> Secondly, I am of a split opinion on whether or not your 'answer' is
> perhaps evading the question. I have decided to make one more try
> at getting data to discuss.
>
> Karl, you were the one that made the claim of a visible pattern.
> Surely you have something to back it?
> You need to show that you are relying on something beyond your own
> personal suspicions. And pieces of the claim are fairly easy to do.
>
> For example, you could do a statistical study of vocabulary density
> for a work like Nehemya
> versus a comparative stretch of Judges.
> Judges has
>  (14086 total words)
> Number of different forms = 1209 (that includes names)
> Nehemyah:
>  (7884 total words) Number of different forms = 1083 (inc. names):
>
> Judges 1-12  (8269 total words)
> Number of different forms = 917 (incl. names)
>

The above examples are overly simple. To do a proper study, one also needs
to recognize how many of the words are happax legomenon, in what sort of
literary structures are they used, and so forth.

>
> Here above you have two narratives, one allegedly from somewhere
> in the First Temple Period, the other from the Second Temple Period.
>

By this argument, then, דברי הימים is a pre-Babylonian Exile writing. In
earlier discussions I indicated which writings I considered pre-Babylonian
Exile, and which post-, and why. Which ones do you consider pre-Babylonian
Exile, and which do you consider post- and why?

>
>
> > which you admit you have not done,
>
> Wrong.
> But why move into 'incorrect personals', so that I need
> to correct your memory? it hurts your case and diverts the issue.
>

I asked you point blank how many times you read Tanakh in Hebrew cover to
cover, and you admitted to only twice (
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew/2010-June/042315.html ). I
remembered your response because it surprised me.

The problem with reading here then there with no going through the text
from beginning to end is that it is very easy to read some parts many times
while neglecting to read other parts even once. That’s why I make it a
practice to read all of it from beginning to end, so I get all of it.

>
> a. I've never said what you just attributed to me, and it's false.
> I did once say that I read the Hebrew Bible cover to cover, twice,
> thirty five years ago. If you think that I haven't been reading it many
> a time since, you've got a strange imagination. I also mentioned that
> I no longer read in 'canonical order', preferring individual books on
> their own. I might read Lamentations one day, Judges another.
>

See above.

Some of the times you have been wrong have been precisely the areas that
are not that interesting to the language scholar. For example, you made the
claim that the verb לון always has a human subject, but in hiphil it refers
to inanimate objects, such as meat from sacrifices or strength, made to
lodge. היום and הלילה (today and tonight) are the same part of speech: you
claimed that it is wrong to place הלילה preceding a verb; but since היום is
found preceding a verb, it is permissible also to place הלילה preceding a
verb. Only by making sure of reading all the text will one find examples
like these.

>
> …
>
> >but there were other studies I considered more important than to
> >prove that pattern. Your past history indicates you will not be satisfied
> >with anything less than a full-blown academic study,
>
> Au contraire,
> I prefer short and illustrative on a public elist. Time is short. What I
> dislike is evasion from issues.
>

Then why are you evading telling which data set of Biblical writings you
consider pre-Babylonian Exile, and which writings are post-Babylonian
Exile? Until we know that we are dealing with the same data set, it is
futile to continue.

<snip further comments>


> braxot
> --
> Randall Buth, PhD
> www.biblicallanguagecenter.com
> Biblical Language Center
> Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life
>

Karl W. Randolph.