Karl, Karl, try to follow the flow of the discussion.  It was you who
first mentioned corruption in regard to Mishnaic Hebrew in the midst of a
discussion we were having about the Masoretic text.  I said it was not a
corruption.  That led eventually to my saying that I did not consider what
the Masoretes did to be a corruption, and for some reason you referred to
that as a red herring, apparently not knowing what a red herring is.

Blessings,

Jerry

Jerry Shepherd
Taylor Seminary
Edmonton, Alberta
[email protected]



On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:08 AM, K Randolph <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jerry:
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:54 PM, Jerry Shepherd <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Karl,
>>
>> This was your statement that led to the prompting of the question:
>>
>> "There is more likelihood that the pronunciation changed when a
>> “corrupted version” (Mishnaic Hebrew), was spoken."
>>
>
> This is all the more the reason why I’m asking your for your definitions.
> In this sentence, Mishnaic Hebrew is already the corrupted language. That
> you didn’t recognize this makes me question how much you understand.
>
>>
>> Blessings,
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>> Jerry Shepherd
>> Taylor Seminary
>> Edmonton, Alberta
>> [email protected]
>>
>>
>> Karl W. Randolph.
>
>
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

Reply via email to