Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Jerry:

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Jerry Shepherd <jshepherd53 AT gmail.com> wrote:

Jerry: "Indeed, this is one of the reasons why I think it is illegitimate to straitjacket the meaning of the biblical text into a preconceived "single unique meaning" lexeme theory that at the same both ignores sound linguistic theory and subjects the biblical text to one's own whims."

This is completely backwards—I don’t straitjacket the text, rather the text leads to the understanding.

If one defines each word’s use by its immediate context, if taken to its logical conclusion, results in linguistic chaos where meanings are subject to one’s personal whims. There needs to be some discipline. What do you suggest should be the discipline?

 

Karl: "This sounds like a complete misreading and misstating of what I do and say. Whatever you mean by “single unique meaning”, it doesn’t sound at all what I say. In other words, you play Humpty Dumpty with my words, and make them say something other than what I intended. Evidence: you latch onto that phrase in isolation without considering the whole of what I have said on the subject."

 

Karl (5/3/2013): "So when one looks at a snapshot of a language, i.e. the use of a language at one point in time, there are very few exceptions, even in modern languages, that each lexeme has one unique meaning."

OK, you define what you understand when you hear the phrase “one unique meaning”.

I want to know, did I use terminology that confuses rather than elucidates? Why is it that my definition of the terms, which I repeated several times, seem not to resonate in you?

Jerry Shepherd

Taylor Seminary

Edmonton, Alberta

jshepherd53 AT gmail.com

 

By the way, can you document any changes that happened to Biblical Hebrew language during the 800 years from Moses to Nebuchadnezzar when it was a natively spoken language?

 

Karl W. Randolph.