Karl, yes, we agree to desagree. And let us go on to other threads. Fiendly to you,
Pere Porta 2011/4/12 K Randolph <[email protected]> > Pere: > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Pere Porta <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Karl, >> >> Sure, the correctness of a proposition is not a voting issue. >> >> Karl, the fact that several words in the Bible have a wrong pointing -I >> do not deny this- does not imply that wrongness is the general rule >> concerning the masorete points. >> > > I think that the Masoretic points as indicators of meaning are correct most > of the time. > > If only 1% of the points are wrong, with an average of three points a word > would mean one in 33 words is wrong, and assuming an average of 10 words a > verse would make fewer than one verse in three could be read wrongly because > of wrongly pointed words. I think that fewer than 1% of points are wrong as > indicators of meaning. > > (I think most are wrong as far as recording Biblical era pronunciation, but > that’s a different issue and irrelevant to this discussion.) > > However, of verses with which we have difficulties, such as this verse in > Psalms, it seems that well over half can be read clearly if all we do is to > change points. > >> >> I sincerely think that you're completely mistaken at claiming that DKYT in >> Ps 51:10 is an adjective. >> >> > Then how do you explain the missing )$R that should be there if DKYT is a > verb? But if it is an adjective, then )$R should not be there and it isn’t. > >> >> Quite friendly, >> >> Pere Porta >> > > It looks as if we have reached an impasse in this case: I point out that > there is a pattern of where nouns, adjectives and adverbs are derived from > roots by use of -YT suffix, point to grammar and syntax that indicates that > this is an adjective, yet you prefer to go along with tradition (Masoretic > points) which you admit is sometimes wrong. It also looks as if you go along > with an argument of what should be according to theory, instead of what is > observed when we read the text. > > So let’s agree to disagree, and go on to other cases. > > Karl W. Randolph. > > >> 2011/4/12 K Randolph <[email protected]> >> >>> >>> That nouns, adverbs and adjectives are derived from verbs by adding a -YT >>> suffix leaves open the possibility that in this case, this is an example of >>> such a derivation. Therefore the lack of an )$R in this phrase is not an >>> anomaly, but expected because of what words are used. That’s how I see it. >>> >>>> >>>> Karl W. Randolph. >>> >>> > -- Pere Porta _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
