The Spirit of Language

[MPaul]

It seems that language often reflects character. For instance, the sounds of German seem to reflect a harsh or strict discipline. People think French reflects beauty. Latin I think reflects nobility. English -- well that depends -- I could go on about that...

But does Hebrew reflect a character? I had wondered about that for years. But I learned Hebrew before there were computers, and I had to focus on learning how to read Hebrew, not how to speak it. I really was not certain of its sounds. However, with computers, there is so much available now to help with pronunciation... and as I practice, I think I understand its character. The Hebrew sounds reflect an expression of the soul. The words come out like they arise from the soul.

Hebrew depends on open syllables (no is open, non is closed -- the consonant at the end stops the air flow), which makes it very emotive. English depends on closed syllables. That raises an issue for translation, I think. How does the translator capture the essence of the Hebrew as an expression of the soul.

Open syllables are fast, and closed syllables are slower. People think the KJV is written in Elizabethan English due to its date. Actually, it is Tudor English, due to the influence of Tyndale on the translators. Tudor English is interesting, in that the syllables are faster than today. And expression then utilized much smaller, less abstract words. Thus, it seems to me, that the English of the KJV reflects the character of language in a manner more similar to Hebrew -- being more a reflection of the soul. No translation has had wider use and a broader impact on the world than the KJV, and one wonders why. I think part of the reason is, that its language reflects character more similarly to Hebrew. But then... what about Greek... maybe, that could be another long post somewhere else.

 

[tansy]

How very interesting! I can't really comment on your ideas. Certainly some languages and accents are pleasanter on the ear, or seem more poetic, whatever.
But perhaps you have a point.
I don't know if you speak in tongues, but in my experience, if one is (what I take to be), praising in tongues, then it is much more flowing than if one is doing 'spiritual warfare' for want of a different term, which is much more staccato.

 

[MPaul]

I don't know if you speak in tongues, but in my experience, if one is ....

Yes, I speak in tongues, just constantly. I do note different characters to the languages involved.

I didn't really know about this forum. I've been into Hebrew a lot lately and expect to continue during the course of this year. Actually, I only returned to the Christian Forums recently due to happen stance. Maybe, I'll do some posting here, especially if I continue to run into the difficulties I've experienced lately with Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

 

[tansy]

Yes, it would be nice to learn Hebrew...languages are fascinating....but I don't have time to pursue languages or linguistics.

 

[yonah_mishael]

Yes, I speak in tongues, just constantly. I do note different characters to the languages involved.

I didn't really know about this forum. I've been into Hebrew a lot lately and expect to continue during the course of this year. Actually, I only returned to the Christian Forums recently due to happen stance. Maybe, I'll do some posting here, especially if I continue to run into the difficulties I've experienced lately with Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

Do you mind if I ask a question? What problems do you seem to be having with Jeremiah and Ezekiel? Translation issues?

I will avoid discussing theologically charged material on this forum, but if it has to do with language, I'd be glad to help you out.

Do you read the Hebrew alphabet (שָׁלוֹ&#1501? Or, do you work with transliteration (shalom/šālôm)?

Regards,
Yonah

 

[MPaul]

Do you mind if I ask a question? What problems do you seem to be having with Jeremiah and Ezekiel? Translation issues?

I will avoid discussing theologically charged material on this forum, but if it has to do with language, I'd be glad to help you out.

Do you read the Hebrew alphabet (שָׁלוֹ&#1501? Or, do you work with transliteration (shalom/šālôm)?

Yonah,

Good of you to make the offer. I guess I would have to call the problems translation, but I am not translating. I am summarizing just now, and I found the translations often inadequate. So I consulted the Hebrew, and wow... I never noticed before how difficult the Hebrew idiom can be, like in Jeremiah or Ezekiel. So I guess I have to call the problem, the idiom.

While you were typing your post to me, no doubt, I was looking at Ezekiel 44. One of the problems I noted was verse 5b -- "mark well the entering in of the house, with every going forth of the sanctuary." (KJV) Note the NKJV says -- "Mark well who may enter the house and all who go out from the sanctuary." I summarized it (going on into the next verse, but keep in mind I have the objective of keeping the summary as brief as possible, without giving up essence) "And set your heart to the entrance with all the exists and say to the rebellious, thus says the lord -- enough of your abominations." So I set out a very different sense of the meaning, but perhaps, you will convince me otherwise.

OK -- but I am really having trouble with chapters 40-48. This NKJV bible next to me has a diagram of this new temple. How on earth did they figure it out?!?? The language seems so ambiguous to me. So how do I summarize it to make it simple for people to understand what it looks like? However, I have to be 100% honest. I'm not going to use discretion without it being noted. I'd prefer to say it's not clear, rather than to say, here is the simple version (if I'm right, but you don't have to know I'm guessing). Can you refer me to something that is convincing on precisely what are the details on what is being described here. Of course, there are endless theological problems with these chapters, but I am making no reference to them in this inquiry with you.

In another section of the forum not long ago, someone asked me to quit using the KJV, because the language is so difficult due to its age. I responded the difficult language is more often due to a different and less liberal translation theory, utilizing less discretion in trying to deal with very difficult Hebrew idiom. I cited Habbakuk chapter three for an example. So, can you tell me what is really being said there??? -- I think the modern translations are deceiving (unless they actually have guessed right, but which one is it) for being so liberal in discretion, while the KJV is difficult but honest.

I found Jeremiah especially difficult, and often even when I felt confident in understanding the idiom, I was uncertain how to express it in English.

I work with the Hebrew alphabet. However, I really don't know how to use it in a forum, so I transliterate here. I use BDB and Langenschieht for dictionaries, but I got a copy of Gensenius not long ago in PDF and I really like it.

Thanks again,
Paul

 

[yonah_mishael]

Shalom, Paul.

Your post is really heavy to me. I don't want to get into the value of English translations. I don't use them except insofar as they give different perspectives, and I think that choosing one English translation over all others generally just limits your understanding of the original language. It's like reading the Iliad in English. If you choose a few faithful translations, it will give you a better understanding of the original Greek.

As regards Ezekiel 44:5, it reads in Hebrew:

וַיֹּ֨אמֶר אֵלַ֜י יְיָ֗ בֶּן־אָדָ֡ם שִׂ֣ים לִבְּךָ֩ וּרְאֵ֨ה בְעֵינֶ֜יךָ וּבְאָזְנֶ֣יךָ שְּׁמָ֗ע אֵ֣ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֤ר אֲנִי֙ מְדַבֵּ֣ר אֹתָ֔ךְ לְכָל־חֻקּ֥וֹת בֵּית־יְיָ֖ וּלְכָל־תּֽוֹרֹתָ֑ו וְשַׂמְתָּ֤ לִבְּךָ֙ לִמְב֣וֹא הַבַּ֔יִת בְּכֹ֖ל מֽוֹצָאֵ֥י הַמִּקְדָּֽשׁ׃​

"And YHWH said to me: 'Human, pay attention and see with your eyes and hear your ears everything that I'm speaking with you for all of the statutes of the house of YHWH and all of his instructions. And you shall pay attention to the entrance to the house and all the gates of the sanctuary.'"

I would take מבוא mavo as "entrance." In modern Hebrew we say כניסה knisa. In the Bible, the word בא ba is used for entering, whereas now we use the word נכנס nichnas. So, I assume this is the connection there. Langenscheidt gives מבוא as "entrance, act of entering, entry" in its normal sense. In modern Hebrew, the word is used for the "introduction" to a book.

The word מוצא motsa is the opposite of מבוא. It refers to an "exit," or in this case a "gate." The normal word for "gate" is שער sha'ar both in biblical and in modern Hebrew. There are to be various gates leading into the Temple precincts. This is what is referred to here.

I don't think either word should be taken as "those who enter" or "those who go out" of the sanctuary, as the NKJV has done.

I can't discuss the theological import of Ezekiel 40-48 here. Nor can I go through each verse and translate it for you. I'm sure you can do web searches to find approximations of what people expect of the Temple as described in Ezekiel. I don't think this is the proper place for the discussion. It's too theological, and I've already stated that I will keep my comments limited to language and have nothing to do with theological issues here.

Hope this helps,
Yonah

 

[yonah_mishael]

Here's a reference to a Christian's construction of the Ezekiel Temple:

Ezekiel's Temple

 

[MPaul]

Yonah,

Thanks for the responses. I'll give them consideration.

When I started this thread, I was thinking I might have some time for conversation on Hebrew, but then, another project I had took off.........................

However, when I was doing Jeremiah, I was struck a number of times on the variety of choices I had for the meaning of words. At that time, I thought it would be nice to have a thread in this forum, wherein people would just pick a Hebrew word and talk about its meaning, whether simple or complex. And then the thread could just go meandering along. So, maybe, if I can get this other project under control I could start something like that, and we could talk about Hebrew some more.

God bless,
Paul

 

[MPaul]

I found on line a PDF on Bible translation –
A Brief History of the Bible in English:
Translations before The King James Authorized Version
Inés Cristina Poblet

What this short article says about Tyndale relates to my original post. Note this quote on why Tyndale used Hebrew manuscripts instead of Latin --
“Partridge explained Tyndale’s efforts as showing a conviction that the “‘Hebrew tongue agreeth a thousand times more with the English than with the Latin’”

Note from my first post –
“People think the KJV is written in Elizabethan English due to its date. Actually, it is Tudor English, due to the influence of Tyndale on the translators. Tudor English is interesting, in that the syllables are faster than today. And expression then utilized much smaller, less abstract words. Thus, it seems to me, that the English of the KJV reflects the character of language in a manner more similar to Hebrew -- being more a reflection of the soul. No translation has had wider use and a broader impact on the world than the KJV, and one wonders why. I think part of the reason is, that its language reflects character more similarly to Hebrew.“

Thus, it would seem Tyndale understood exactly what he was doing in translation. I do not want to have any less of an understanding of the relation of the English to the Hebrew. But then, Tyndale was a genius.

 

[yonah_mishael]

Are you on the Hebrew language forum to argue for the primacy of the KJV? Isn't there a board for that already? We're here to look at the Hebrew, not to worry about which translation is perfect (since none of them are, no matter how dogmatic you wax in their defense).

 

[MPaul]

Are you on the Hebrew language forum to argue for the primacy of the KJV? Isn't there a board for that already? We're here to look at the Hebrew, not to worry about which translation is perfect (since none of them are, no matter how dogmatic you wax in their defense).

Yonah,

I would have preferred a response from you, on whether you have an opinion on what phase of the English language best aligns with Hebrew and why.

Are you on the Hebrew language board to monitor and establish what is permissible to be posted here? Actually, it appears you are here to teach Hebrew. Then, why do you at times make posts which in reality have nothing to do with actual instruction in learning the specifics of the language? Ah, it only makes sense that incidental issues arise for your consideration and comment. In truth, there is a broad expanse of issues which are appropriate for study and review in attempting to comprehend Hebrew as a biblical language.

As a Christian, one of the reasons I am interested in Hebrew is, not just to be able to read the Bible, but to consider all aspects of Bible study, including issues on how Scripture is represented in English. I have not advocated in this thread the supremacy of the KJV, but I have noted the great success it has enjoyed throughout the world and history, and I have questioned whether that in part is due to Tudor English having certain similarities to Hebrew. It is most appropriate to do so as a part of Bible study, not just due to the wide spread popularity the KJV has enjoyed, but to understand how language functions in general in representing the Word of God.

In truth, it is my belief that the KJV is the best translation of the Bible in English – at least for now. And I am well aware that many Christians would not agree with me, actually might prefer to take offense at my opinion, as many Jews as well could chose to be insulted by posting not implicitly acknowledging the superiority of their translations. However, I do not believe that I should thereby feel precluded from raising for consideration issues that are entirely legitimate for understanding the expression of the language of the Word of God in Hebrew and English. I do not believe that I must feel precluded from making any reference to William Tyndale, his ability and understanding of language, as inappropriate to the study of Hebrew. I do not believe I must hide my opinion on his great talent as a translator.

I do not wish to advocate the superiority of the KJV in this thread. If I wanted to do so, I would not pick an issue of the similarity of speech between Tudor English and Hebrew as a basis of argument – at least not yet. I am merely examining the issue, and I have my doubts how far it can go toward substantive conclusion. However, that is not say that I believe it would be impossible or inappropriate to note an opinion on the value of KJV in this forum for mature discussion. Denying permission to do so actually would constitute censorship, which is a form of arguing for the primacy of another view. I am not used to environments where censorship is imposed, and I do not perceive the reason it should be a part of this forum or a specific basis and definition for such implementation.

Yonah, I wish I could apologize to you for my posting, but I cannot. As an alternative, may I suggest that you merely ignore threads that express opinions different than your own. Or do you feel you cannot function in this forum, if things are said with which you have strong disagreement, whether you are involved in the thread or not? If so, I will consider not posting further here. I have no wish to offend you.

And incidentally, I should feel offended that you accuse me of dogmatically waxing in the defense of the KJV, of imputing such a motive to me in the thread, of reducing me to such duplicity – but I will attribute it all for now to mere misunderstanding, and let it go.