kwrandolph wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:58 pm
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pmKarl, there's a difference between a cognate word and a borrowed word.
You think I don’t know that?
Something you said above came across to me as though your were treated a possible cognates as a borrowed. Or as though you were assuming a word was borrowed. No biggie
kwrandolph wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:58 pm
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pm1. Borrowed words behave differently when they are brought into the borrowing language.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I would say typically.
kwrandolph wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:58 pm
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pm2. They often retain their original spelling
True.
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pm3. They can even can have markers they tell you they are borrowed
Not always.
The reason I mention this is natural cognates as opposed to borrowed words have had more time to undergo phonological change (shifting), such as a stop/plosive slipping into a fricative, or as in our current discussion a sibilant dropping the lateral feature (/ś/-->/s/). (I'm not even sure there's a need to attributing such a phenomenon to pressure from another language. I do think it's entirely plausible to posit the /ś/-->/s/ shift during the Babylonian exile since the data shows Aramaic did not have/ś/ as a phone. It is the best expansion for the sameq-sin puzzle.)
Back to the point, when establishing whether a word is a natural cognate of a borrow, consider the cognates
zahav and
dhahab. At some point in Ancient Hebrew the/dh/ shifted to a /z/. If at some later point in the development of Hebrew a /dh/ word came into the language by way of borrowing I would make the prediction that we would find that word being pronounced with a /d/, not a /z/.
kwrandolph wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:58 pm
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pm4. A language may have synonyms, one a cognate, the other a borrowed word.
That’s what I suspect happened here—שער being the native word referring to storming, סער being the imported word referring to wind that’s also used for blowing away chaff. But that’s speculation, as we don’t have evidence.
We are all speculating here; that is the job of linguistic science, to infer to the best explanation. "Storming" is a good guess, but I lean towards Isaac's guess that it is the more generic physical STIR UP. the use of the word HEART points to an idiom, which would favor a physical simile, compare
pharaoh's heart was hardened. Idioms are meant to convey an abstract idea by way of a physical expression,
the King of Aram's heart was stirred up. In translation there's no need to carry over the word heart,
the King of Aram was upset.
I can just picture what the sailors with Jonah experienced, probably not too much different from what I experienced on the North Atlantic once—wind a force 10 gale, waves over 100 feet high, but no rain. During the short times we were on top of a wave, we could see all the way to a lumpy horizon. Then the ship nosed down to the trough between waves, we could feel the vibration and hear the sound of the engines revving while the propellors pushed air, then we were back to watching the dark grey, foam-splotched next wave towering over us. Can you imagine the terror the sailors with Jonah experienced facing something like this?
Storm is definitely appropriate in Jonah 1:4. Notice the parallel
רֽוּחַ־גְּדוֹלָה֙ ---->
סַֽעַר־גָּד֖וֹל
Have I ever told you, I love the book of Jonah
kwrandolph wrote:
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pmIn English
apple and
pear are both cognate of each other, as well they are both cognates of the borrowed French
fruit.
I don’t know from where you get your English examples, as all the words you mention have Germanic roots. Even though “fruit” presently has a French spelling, it also has a Germanic root. The ancestors to “apple” and “pear” are found in Old English, referred to specific fruits and the Old English words are closer to modern English than the French words are to English.
No. These two words were "fruit" words, they were dialectical, and split English in two, North and South. This is well established by English historical linguists. Native speakers borrowed
fruit from their interaction with the French speaking nobles. After that
pear and
apple began to be used for these specifics fruits as we know them. This phenomenon is quite well documented in English, French having been spoken for so long on British soil. Another example of this is the
warden and
guard. Notice how they kept the ancient spelling including the u attached to the g, French spelling went on to drop the u,
garde. The u by the way Hellas is understand how
warden and
guard are ancient cognates long before
guard was introduced. /w/ is not only a bilabial, is absolutely a Velar, hence cognates like
guerre and
war.
Anyhow with the introduction of
guard into English, the borrowed word took on the generic idea, while the older native
warden was assigned a special meaning. A well established pattern that accounts for the extraordinary amount of words and nuanced synonyms in the English vocabulary.
kwrandolph wrote:
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pmBTW, all three of these are cognates of the Hebrew
פרי.
Nope. “Cognates” refer to languages from the same language family. English and Biblical Hebrew are not cognates.
Yes. I was using cognate very generously there.
kwrandolph wrote:
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pmAnd so we find unrelated languages that have ancient cognates.
Those can be just coincidence.
It's undeniable that several hundreds of words across language families are very ancient cognates suggesting an original tongue. Not on the biblical timeline of course. An example of these is presence of COW words across thousands of languages. Take Swahili
ng'ombe, the /ng'/ corresponds to the /c/ both velars, and the /mb/ corresponds to /w/, both labials. Through the process of consonantal reversal they can be traced to Hebrew /baqar/, compare Spanish
vaca. Quite often the Hebrew weird can bee shown to be three older cognate as its triliteral root will contain the biliteral roots of the other cognates. See for example
כֶּלֶב, K-L-B. Greek
lukos shares the k and the l while Spanish
lobo shares the /l/and the /b/. Interestingly English wolf preserves all three original consonants, the /w/ shifting from the /k/, and the f shifting from the /b/. So if your first name is Caleb and your last name Wolf Todd have the same name twice so to speak.
P-R (bilabial-liquid) words meaning fruit are abundant across language families, but even more abundant are P-R words meaning the number 2. Hundreds of languages. And isn't it interesting that when you have two things you have a
pair of them.
kwrandolph wrote:
Jemoh66 wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pmI thought shaken, Disturbed might be better than "blown away."
Translation may come out better that way. But within Biblical Hebrew language itself, this looks like an idiomatic use for a term meaning “blown away”.
Karl W. Randolph.
The problem with that is blown away is itself an idiom that means something different in English, something like "wowed". The blowing idea is ok, but I think the intent is to sir. I refer you back to Jonah. God hurls a great wind which causes a great stirring in the sea (storm).
וַֽיהוָ֗ה הֵטִ֤יל רֽוּחַ־גְּדוֹלָה֙ אֶל־הַיָּ֔ם וַיְהִ֥י סַֽעַר־גָּד֖וֹל בַּיָּ֑ם
The wind acts like a stirring stick.
