cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solon (Post 183308)

I attended a lecture recently by Gary A Rendsburg, who is a seriously smart guy and an engaging speaker. Much of his work is available for free online. If you're at all interested in Jewish studies, Hebrew, or Biblical scholarship, this is a fine resource.

http://jewishstudies.rutgers.edu/faculty/grendsburg/

At the lecture, Rendsburg alluded to an idea recently put forth by noted Hebrew scholar Ze'en ben-Hayyim concerning Genesis 2.18 and the word "helpmate" (awkwardly translated as "an help meet" in the KJV).

According to Rendsburg, Ben-Hayyim argues that that the Hebrew word might not connote "help," and its corresponding implications of subservience, but instead is a Hebrew cognate for an Arab word meaning "virgin woman." Somehow this all becomes possible with comparative linguistics and the recognition that word roots are more vague in Hebrew because of the missing vowels. (I'm not an expert, just the messenger.) Nevertheless, it makes for an interesting idea that God created a "woman" for Adam, not (necessarily) a "helper."

This is admittedly second-hand info. When/If Ben-Hayyim's article comes out, and if it appears in English, I'll provide more information.

Triliteral root languages are nigh impossible for the average dingdong such as myself.

As some may not be aware, Arabic and Hebrew typically do not write with vowels.

And most root words simply involve three consonants. From context, one can determine what word is truly implied by the spelling. (Egyptian usually followed the triliteral root rule, with some five letter and a few two letter root words, i.e., Ra).

So most people who teach the rest of us, which word is implied by the spelling and the rest of us say, "okay." Because Hebrew lost its vitality as a living language the connection to its linguistic past is somewhat tenuous, unlike Arabic which never became almost a pure liturgical language. Thus cross comparisons is useful for Hebrew.

I have almost no understanding of Hebrew concepts other than to say, my head spins each time I restart my learning thereof. Arabic is much more elegant, and Egyptian is fascinating, but what we have to read in Egyptian is sporadic, (I've only struggled with the Book of the Dead).