As one who has had the privilege of participating in taking the Hebrew Bible and translating it into a non-indo-European language, I cannot disagree more strongly. The required word studies have resulted in both basic meaning and extended meanings of every word that I have encountered, and these have been bounced off of and checked by the scholarship. Even this list helped with some of those studies and checks.
This is why I enjoy being a part of this group. If I were of the opinion expressed in this posting, I would throw up my hands and move on to more profitable things. If BH study has no firm results, why bother? But it does have firm results, so I continue to try to learn. Paul Zellmer -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of fred burlingame Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:20 AM To: K Randolph Cc: B-Hebrew Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] art vs. science BH currently suffers from a lack of such structured examination. No default position exists. No general agreement prevails on the meaning of each word in the masoretic text ("MT"), and as each word appears in the text. Hence, no organized and ongoing inquiry into the language itself can proceed. The investigators, the scholars if you will, have no standard against which to propose (& measure) alternate hypotheses as to the meaning of each word in the MT, and as it appears in such text. ישראל נוע for 40 years in the desert (according to the story). BH study seems to so meander today, in the absence of an organized method of inquiry into the meaning of the language. _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
