Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Semitic Syntax: Not Strong Evidence?
#10
Shlama Akhi Steve,

I think you are avoiding my question, or perhaps I'm not phrasing it correctly. Just a simple question really.

When you study Hebrew in a university setting, is not the standard Biblical Hebrew? Likewise, isn't Classical Arabic taught with the Quran being one of the primary texts? Aren't both of these collections considered to be the examples of the foundations of those classical tongues?

Is the Greek of the New Testament versions considered to be a primary source in any linguistics, other than in a western Christian theological setting?

Pointing to the argument that "this is one of the primary text of koine greek" doesn't really answer the essence of my inquiry.

The Hebrew of the OT and the Arabic of the Quran aren't "koine" in any sense of the term. So that is what I'm asking. Is any other scripture that you are aware of, written in something like a "koine"?

A cognate would be if, for example, a Hindu text was written in a dialect of Sanskrit that was heavily influence by Chinese syntax. Or, alternatively, if a Taoist text was written in a Chinese dialect that was heavily influenced by Sanskrit (Indo-European) syntax.

The above is the type of thing I'd look for as a cognate to the Semitic substratum of the Greek of the NT.

+Shamasha
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Semitic Syntax: Not Strong Evidence? - by Paul Younan - 11-20-2013, 12:28 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)