>> theologically based beliefs regarding what script the Torah was
>> written in, what the value of the Massoretic vowels was,
>
> "Value" pertaining to vowels? I knew the consonants had values, [...]
>
Karl, I don't suppose Yitzhak will take your statement here seriously,
although he may make a mockery of it. The "value" of a vowel is a
technical linguistic term for the kind of sound made.
well as not knowing any Semitic language other than Hebrew (or do you
know some Aramaic?),
>> As for the Shin, Resh, Ghayin, and Pe/Fe statements: Both Shin and Resh
>> are attested, and Ghayin and Pe/Fe are not attested but plausible. I had
>> previously on this list provided evidence of the differentiation of
Shin/Sin in
>> West-Semitic from approx 2000 BCE.
>>
> In Biblical Hebrew? Where is that evidence?
>
No, in West Semitic. Read what Yitzhak wrote. I'm sure he can tell you
which cuneiform tablets (Ebla?) he is referring to.
> Accadian, the earliest attested Semitic language according to your
> theory, lost a third of its consonantal phonemes, while Old South
> Arabic, which was much later, lost none. Stop and think a
> moment....does that make sense?
>
Perfect sense. Phonetic change proceeds at different speeds and in
different directions in different languages.
But Yitzhak was being unnecessarily provocative in writing "Hebrew is
very much a dialect of Phoenician", so suggesting that Hebrew had a
lower status than Phoenician. It would be more accurate to say that
Hebrew and Phoenician were different dialects within the broader
Canaanite or NW Semitic language.
>> Biblical Hebrew and Massoretic Hebrew are one and the same.
>
> Even in my first year Hebrew class I was taught that Biblical Hebrew
> was written without points and cantillations, but that Masoretic
> Hebrew was easier to learn because of the points.
>
Here you are simply arguing about definitions. But on this one I am with
Karl. For me, biblical Hebrew is the language spoken and written by the
biblical authors. The form of the language recorded by the Masoretes is
only slightly different, but for me those differences make Masoretic
Hebrew different from biblical Hebrew. Thus those obscure multiple vowel
lengths and syllable breaks in the middle of vowels proposed by Khan may
be features of Masoretic Hebrew, but that does not imply that they are
features of biblical Hebrew.
> Not yet in electronic form so I can read it on my PDA, as I can now
> read unpointed text.
>
>
If you have enough memory you can download the images. Or you could do
yourself and the world a favour by transcribing the scrolls in
electronic form and making the text available - if no one else has
already done this.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.