Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

1. You are mistaken to consider this exchange waste of time.

2. If so, then (simplified) Biblical Hebrew is being spoken today.

3. Sorry, but "two (or more) languages descended from the same source  
language" is vague. Did Arabic split from Hebrew?

4. Not everybody.

5. Sorry, but this is not Hebrew etymology. Root based Hebrew was  
never a different language. Comparison with Indo-European languages  
is invalid.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Apr 28, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Barry wrote:

> On 4/28/2013 5:06 PM, Isaac Fried wrote:
> > 1. As to "People generally do not write in a language they do not
> > speak", Biblical Hebrew and spoken Hebrew (as possibly used by King
> > David when mundanely conversing with his wives and children, as  
> > opposed
> > to the language he used to address God) are not "different"  
> > languages.
>
> Ok, I think I would agree... So why claim that we don't know if  
> biblical Hebrew was never spoken?
>
> > 2. "Cognate" is nebulous, as it says nothing on the genetic
> > relationships between these "cognates".
>
> "Cognate" simply means two (or more) languages descended from the  
> same source language. Latin and Greek are obvious examples, Hebrew  
> and Aramaic...
>
> > 3. "real study" = stuffing the head with baloney made up by some  
> > eminent
> > mumblers.
>
> I see – everybody else is mistaken, and you are here to set us  
> straight.
>
> > 4. I am absolutely ignorant of what you mean by Hebrew etymology.  
> > Please
> > explain.
>
> Etymology simply means the development or history of the word in  
> its language, often going back to when the language was a different  
> language. I haven't studied historical linguistics for Semitic  
> languages, but an example in English would be "nice," which can be  
> traced back to the Latin *nescius* (foolish, ignorant). It comes  
> into English through Norman French, and the semantic range suffers  
> grievously along the way. It's also a good warning against assuming  
> that the earlier use of the word must carry the same meaning as the  
> later (the genetic fallacy).
>
> Don't worry, after this response, I won't waste any more of your time.
>
> --
> N.E. Barry Hofstetter
> Semper melius Latine sonat
> The American Academy
> http://www.theamericanacademy.net
> The North American Reformed Seminary
> http://www.tnars.net
> Bible Translation Magazine
> http://www.bible-translation.net
>
> http://my.opera.com/barryhofstetter/blog