Anyway the list is constantly going off track with "Hurrian". None of this
makes any sense. I suppose most of you are aware of that.
Hurrian was spoken in the mountains and hills of Northern Mesopotamia. It's
obvious from all the Sumero-Akkadianisms that the cultural influence is
unilaterally from the south to the north.
It happens that Hurrian people have exerted a short-lived power thanks to
the temporary military superiority brought in by Indo-Iranians, who had
domesticated horses and trained them for war.
It just does not make any sense that Hurrian could ever have had any
influence on Semitic languages, spoken in areas where there probably never
lived any Hurrian speakers and even fewer Hurro-Semitic bilinguals. The idea
suggested by Bush of a Hurrian influence on Hebrew is nothing but an
idiosyncratic and unsupported fancy, which does not even fit the reality of
Hurrian in the first place. This fancy seems to have been proposed in order
to justify a number of unsupported claims about Hurrian. In my opinion it's
nothing but a smoke screen.
Would it be possible to get rid of all this absurd and constant
Hurrianesquery and let Hurrian rest in peace?