> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Dean Snyder
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 8:41 AM
> We also have to remember that the Siloam inscription test:
> * was in "handwriting" incised in stone
Does this mean that the form of the characters in the Siloam inscription were different from those typically used in Phoenician and Paleo-Hebrew texts?
> * was in a different orthography than modern Hebrew
I'm not sure quite what this means. I thought it was agreed that the orthographies of Modern Hebrew and Paleo-Hebrew were different...?
> * using dots to separate words
This.really.shouldn't.confuse.people.terribly.after.a.few.seconds.
> * and lacked vowel indicators (matres lectionis), very important
> contextual clues for reading modern Hebrew
Doesn't Paleo-Hebrew lack them as well?
Thanks,
/|/|ike
P.S. I think this whole legibility test trip is irrelevant. I'm trying to figure out what does and doesn't separate things.
