Nir: On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. <[email protected]>wrote:
> karl, > > i was not getting into etymology at all, > Etymology is important and its recognition useful, as long as it is constrained by recognized linguistic principles and is handled very carefully. A difficulty in Biblical Hebrew is that there are derivatives that have homographs could come from more than one root (no evidence that they were originally pronounced the same). A proper understanding of the rules of derivation helps in discussions like this. Also a bit of humility in recognizing that some words may not have roots from which they are derived, even though their forms may lead some people to speculate that they are derived from known roots. > i was just trying to understand the point in isaac' question, which still > escapes me. some of the associations he makes with BH are clearly much more > far-fetched than the one i was making (independent of its veracity). yet he > was alarmed by this one. > I don’t attempt to understand his theory, as it is based on idiosyncratic speculation based on a self-admitted ignorance of linguistics. It could be that he has trouble with this question because it goes against his theory. Maybe he has never noticed the mucus trail left behind by slugs and snails which, when dried, can shimmer in sunlight. Like you, I don’t understand his objection to this based on his past practices. > > nir cohen > > Karl W. Randolph. _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
