Oh yes, since "Arab-she-you" means "Arabic language." I get it now. Similarly, סוף-היא "reed-she" means "storm" and אוזניה "ear-she-she" means "headphone."Isaac Fried wrote:Hebrew finds it useful to compound the end personal pronouns, for example,
עֲרָבִית = ערב-היא-את, 'the arabic language'
עֲרָבִיָּה = ערבי-היא-היא 'an arab woman'
Isaac Fried, Boston University
[heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Jason says
Since there is no Israeli language, therefore
ישראלי = ישראל-היא, 'a man (or thing) of Israel'
ישראלית = ישראלי-את 'a woman (or thing) of Israel'
Isaac Fried, Boston University
I am sorry, but "Arab-she-you" is silly English. עֲרָבִית = ערב-היא-את is, however, very fine Hebrew.Oh yes, since "Arab-she-you" means "Arabic language"
I am really very glad you do.I get it now
סוֹפָה = סוֹף-היא is 'her end'. The סוּף in סוּפָה, 'storm', has nothing to do with "reed". Yet גּוּפָה = גוּף-היא is 'corpse'.Similarly, סוף-היא "reed-she" means "storm"
In Hebrew: ראש-קוֹל?"headphone"
Since there is no Israeli language, therefore
ישראלי = ישראל-היא, 'a man (or thing) of Israel'
ישראלית = ישראלי-את 'a woman (or thing) of Israel'
Isaac Fried, Boston University
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Would you be willing to translate an entire verse (not just a word) into your semantic building blocks?
How about Genesis 1:1 in your breakdown?
How about Genesis 1:1 in your breakdown?
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Jason
It is not clear to me what you mean by "translate". The insertion of the personal pronouns into the root is specific to Hebrew (and its sister languages). The indo-European languages lost their root system a long time ago, and their natural grammar vanished for good into the historical fog of the millennia.
One thing is, in my opinion, immutably true about Hebrew, which is that the sounds אוֹ, אוּ, אִי represent, inevitably, personal pronouns - references to an actor or to a thing.
Who specifically these אוֹ, אוּ, אִי are needs to be learned from the body of the language. Thus
סוּגַר = ס-הוּא-גר, 'cage'
שוֹבַר = ש-הוּא-בר, 'coupon'
סִיגַר = ס-היא-גר, 'cigar, an enclosed סגוּר roll of tobacco for smoking'
סָגִיר = סג-היא-ר, 'closeable'
סָגוּר = סג-הוּא-ר, 'closed'
סְגוֹר = סג-הוּא-ר, 'close!'
שוּלָח = ש-הוּא-לח, 'sent away'
שָלוּחַ = של-הוּא-ח, 'emissary'
שָלִיחַ = של-היא-ח, 'envoy'
Isaac Fried, Boston University
It is not clear to me what you mean by "translate". The insertion of the personal pronouns into the root is specific to Hebrew (and its sister languages). The indo-European languages lost their root system a long time ago, and their natural grammar vanished for good into the historical fog of the millennia.
One thing is, in my opinion, immutably true about Hebrew, which is that the sounds אוֹ, אוּ, אִי represent, inevitably, personal pronouns - references to an actor or to a thing.
Who specifically these אוֹ, אוּ, אִי are needs to be learned from the body of the language. Thus
סוּגַר = ס-הוּא-גר, 'cage'
שוֹבַר = ש-הוּא-בר, 'coupon'
סִיגַר = ס-היא-גר, 'cigar, an enclosed סגוּר roll of tobacco for smoking'
סָגִיר = סג-היא-ר, 'closeable'
סָגוּר = סג-הוּא-ר, 'closed'
סְגוֹר = סג-הוּא-ר, 'close!'
שוּלָח = ש-הוּא-לח, 'sent away'
שָלוּחַ = של-הוּא-ח, 'emissary'
שָלִיחַ = של-היא-ח, 'envoy'
Isaac Fried, Boston University
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
This is particularly the part of your position that I think most absurd. These are simply vocal patterns used to manipulate roots. The root may stand for a certain concept (or more than one), and the specific vocal pattern into which it is fit determines the part of speech that the word becomes. Is it an adjective? Does it represent a state? Is it a verbal expression? Active or passive? Causative or reflexive? The vocal pattern is not the simplification of personal pronouns. It is simply VOWELS being used in tandem with the roots. The way that you read אכיל "edible" as אכ-היא-ל is just baseless. I cannot agree with this in the slightest, yet you play it as your trump card. This is neither immutably true nor arguably true. It's simply false.Isaac Fried wrote:One thing is, in my opinion, immutably true about Hebrew, which is that the sounds אוֹ, אוּ, אִי represent, inevitably, personal pronouns - references to an actor or to a thing.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
What I meant by "translate" is "convert into individual pieces."
בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ
ב-ראש-היא-את באר אלה-היא-הם את ה-שמ-היא-הם ואת ה-ארץ
Something like that. Using whatever random, arbitrary, and theoretical divisions you think are necessary. Actually show us how you analyze language beyond the level of the individual word. Just how many personal pronouns do you think need to be inserted into an entire verse to show where the words came from?
I have a feeling that if you take this beyond the level of words and word groups, even you will see just how obscenely unfounded this theory is.
בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ
ב-ראש-היא-את באר אלה-היא-הם את ה-שמ-היא-הם ואת ה-ארץ
Something like that. Using whatever random, arbitrary, and theoretical divisions you think are necessary. Actually show us how you analyze language beyond the level of the individual word. Just how many personal pronouns do you think need to be inserted into an entire verse to show where the words came from?
I have a feeling that if you take this beyond the level of words and word groups, even you will see just how obscenely unfounded this theory is.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Jason says
שוּגַר = ש-הוּא-גר the internal (the "infix") PP הוּא refers to the beneficiary of of the act שגר. Same with הֻשְלַךְ = הוּא-שלך.
The way that you read אכיל "edible" as אכ-היא-ל is just baseless. I cannot agree with this in the slightest, yet you play it as your trump card. This is neither immutably true nor arguably true. It's simply false.
Jason, I am sorry, but you need to somehow substantiate your claims to me. Claiming that it "is just baseless", "I cannot agree with this in the slightest", or that "It's simply false", is no more than expressing a personal hunch.
What I am really waiting for is to hear a clear and decisive logical argument as to why I am wrong.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
It is really really not clear to me how the "vocal patterns" "manipulate roots." What is this "manipulate"?These are simply vocal patterns used to manipulate roots
Yes, but how is this accomplished? Look at this סוּגַר is 'cage', but שוּגַר is 'sent away'. So, what is the inherent (part of speech) distinction between them. Easy. In סוּגַר = ס-הוּא-גר the internal PP הוּא refers to the device itself, while inThe root may stand for a certain concept (or more than one), and the specific vocal pattern into which it is fit determines the part of speech that the word becomes
שוּגַר = ש-הוּא-גר the internal (the "infix") PP הוּא refers to the beneficiary of of the act שגר. Same with הֻשְלַךְ = הוּא-שלך.
It is not clear to me what this abstraction "used in tandem" is supposed to mean, and, still, how this VOWEL tandemization is supposed to create adjectives. Here, it is easy, יצחק חמוּד is with חמוּד = חמ-הוּא-ד in which the internal הוּא refers to יצחק having the property expressed by חמד. What is wrong with this?The vocal pattern is not the simplification of personal pronouns. It is simply VOWELS being used in tandem with the roots
The way that you read אכיל "edible" as אכ-היא-ל is just baseless. I cannot agree with this in the slightest, yet you play it as your trump card. This is neither immutably true nor arguably true. It's simply false.
Jason, I am sorry, but you need to somehow substantiate your claims to me. Claiming that it "is just baseless", "I cannot agree with this in the slightest", or that "It's simply false", is no more than expressing a personal hunch.
What I am really waiting for is to hear a clear and decisive logical argument as to why I am wrong.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Jason says
This claim is restricted to words and therefore "how you analyze language beyond the level of the individual word" is, I am sorry to say, immaterial here.
I will eagerly look at any counter example you may come up with.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
What I am saying in this thread is something very clear and very well defined (also true and useful), namely, that the sounds I, O, U in a Hebrew word are not random sounds, but are rather, immutably, the personal pronouns היא-הוּא standing for an actor or a thing.What I meant by "translate" is "convert into individual pieces."
בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ
ב-ראש-היא-את באר אלה-היא-הם את ה-שמ-היא-הם ואת ה-ארץ
Something like that. Using whatever random, arbitrary, and theoretical divisions you think are necessary. Actually show us how you analyze language beyond the level of the individual word. Just how many personal pronouns do you think need to be inserted into an entire verse to show where the words came from?
I have a feeling that if you take this beyond the level of words and word groups, even you will see just how obscenely unfounded this theory is.
This claim is restricted to words and therefore "how you analyze language beyond the level of the individual word" is, I am sorry to say, immaterial here.
I will eagerly look at any counter example you may come up with.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
I'm sure that you're convinced that every word can be analyzed in this way. Since every word has vowels, I can imagine that every instance of a non-a or -e vowel will be interpreted by you in this way. It's convenient that so many words have i, o, and u inside them. It's a theory of convenience, since the vowel choices are so extremely limited.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: [heb]עֲרָבִי[/heb] Isaiah 13:20
Jason says
For example:
חוֹתָם = ח-הוּא-תם, 'seal', from the root חתם.
חֲלוֹם = חל-הוּא-ם, 'dream', from the root חלם.
but
חָתוּם = חת-הוּא-ם, 'sealed', still from the root חתם.
שוּלַח = ש-הוּא-לח, 'was sent away', from the root שלח.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
Yes. Indeed. The sounds i, o, u in any Hebrew word invariably stand for the personal pronoun היא-הוּא referring to an actor in a verb, and to a thing in a noun. invariably. It is the ultimate insight into the "morphology" of the Hebrew word.I'm sure that you're convinced that every word can be analyzed in this way. Since every word has vowels, I can imagine that every instance of a non-a or -e vowel will be interpreted by you in this way. It's convenient that so many words have i, o, and u inside them. It's a theory of convenience, since the vowel choices are so extremely limited.
For example:
חוֹתָם = ח-הוּא-תם, 'seal', from the root חתם.
חֲלוֹם = חל-הוּא-ם, 'dream', from the root חלם.
but
חָתוּם = חת-הוּא-ם, 'sealed', still from the root חתם.
שוּלַח = ש-הוּא-לח, 'was sent away', from the root שלח.
Isaac Fried, Boston University