On 4/28/2013 3:47 PM, Isaac Fried wrote:
1. It is but a mere guess that Biblical Hebrew was ever spoken. Also, as
is common in poetry to interrogate contemporary speakers could be well
nigh useless, it is the author that needs to be interrogated.
Who doubts it, except for you? People generally do not write in a
language they do not speak. I have raised the question before of whether
the later OT materials reflect a "classical language" parallel to the
Atticizing tendencies of Greek authors in late antiquity, but no one saw
fit to address that question.
2. For "cognate" languages the level of cognition matters. Aramaic, is
not Arabic, and certainly not "Akkadian". In fact, one may claim what
one wants on Akkadian, there is no one to verify it or dispute it.
Level of cognition? Really?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cognition?s=t
cog·ni·tion
noun
1. the act or process of knowing; perception.
2. the product of such a process; something thus known, perceived, etc.
3. knowledge.
3. "Comparative Philology", is possibly an exercise in futility. I have
not seen yet not one one example as to its usefulness.
You need to get out and do some real study, rather than just keep making
stuff up.
4. One needs to clearly explain what one means by Hebrew "etymology".
You really don't know that etymology is?
--
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
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.