Peter:
It was in logic that I first heard the argument that it is a fallacy to assume that a lack of evidence merely means that we lack evidence of something that exists. Rather we must leave open the possibility that a lack of evidence is evidence of lack, that that something does not exist. In the latter case, lack of evidence is a positive (of a negation) not a negative (don't have the data).
When there is positive evidence from within a language contrasted to positive evidence from a cognate language, I claim that internal evidence trumps cognate language evidence all the time.
In the case of XRM, I see positive evidence that one basic meaning fits all uses, therefore there is no evidence for more than one root and none needed, therefore the lack of evidence is evidence of lack, i.e. that there was no more than one root used in Biblical Hebrew.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.