language constantly evolves and changes ...; as independent functions of: a. time;
b. use; and c. user. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/17/books/17words.html?_r=2&hp hence, the attempt to corral precise meaning of a word, by comparison of usages and other words, can prove an elusive goal, indeed. regards, fred burlingame On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. <[email protected]>wrote: > > The Hebrew root is not isolated, it is not a GALMUD גלמוד ; it > > has an extended family. It appears to me that the root XLD חלד is a > > variant of > גלד, גלש> > חלד, חלז, חלט, חלץ, חלש> > *קלד, קלט, קלס, קלש>> > >and that XLD means essentially 'encrusted, solid'. It is not > >absolutely clear what the biblical XOLED is, but it is possibly an > >encrusted or shelled animal, or reptile, such as our CAB צב or > >XILAZON חלזון from the root חלז (or possibly GALASH), that is > >enclosed in a GELED גלד shell, from which it NEXLAC נחלץ and > >into which it NIQLAT נקלט > >The post-biblical XALUDAH (possibly influenced by Greek) is an oxide > >GELED or tarnish. It appears to me related to XELAH חלאה > > > Isaac Fried, Boston university > > isaac, i doubt it whether there is ANY common denominator between ALL these > words (except maybe GULA$...? :) ) > > your argument for it is somewhat arbitrary, too. most of our daily > experience is with encrusted and/or solid objects. most of them, like EC, > EVEN, QIR, CUQ, QERAX, E$ET (i hope by now my spelling is more correct) are > not derived from these roots. not even the word MUCAQ. so why would > "encrusted, solid" characterize the feeble XILAZON and not the solid E$ET? > > finally, if indeed XELED really belongs to the class of words describing > abstract colossal concepts (like "life", "world", "time" etc), > i would hardly expect it to derive from this or that material quality, > to the exclusion of the other material properties (here, excluding MAIM > and $AMAIM, among others. which, according to Gen. 1, were supposedly > at the very beginning of it all... > > ...AND assuming that XELED refers to the material world, a fact which not > all > of us accept in the first place. > > nir cohen > > _______________________________________________ > b-hebrew mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew > _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
