06-16-2008, 08:31 AM
Yochanan5730 Wrote:Shalomie Homies <!-- s--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="
as many know, i have been working on a personal translation/interpretation of the Aramaic New Covenant. i am neither a Greek primacist nor Aramaic primacist when it comes to the scripture. honestly, because i am getting the same results from both camps. the same arguments one way are posed in the other. one main argument for the Aramaic camp is that the Greek manuscripts contain alot of things that Aramaic can readily compensate for. now, i am, by no means, arguing for the Greek camp, but in my work of study i keep coming across a lot of, what i call, "Greek-isms". Greek words "Aramaicised" (i hope someone understands my befuddled engrish <!-- s--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif" alt="
anyhoo, this is leading to a question, and it is not meant to be a challenge, but a question that you may already have figured out would be:
why? <!-- stupid: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/withstupid.gif" alt="
why are there all those "Greek-isms" in a language that has words of its own to express the same thing? <!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: -->
In Yeshua,
Z'ev Yochanan
Shlama Akhi Z'ev:
Give me an example of a "greekism". Do you mean "loan words"? For example the Greek word "nomos" became the Aramaic word "namusa". Both are used as Torah or Law in the New Testament. The Aramaic word for Torah is "aurayta" and is only used three times in the Peshitta, while all other times "namusa" is used. I'm not sure why "aurayta" isn't used more often. Only Yeshua used it, and only in Matthew 11:13, 12:5 and 22:40. Perhaps "nomos/namusa" was more commonly expressed as the idea of "common law or tradition" while "aurayta" had a more protected use among the Jews.
Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->