4 ms·

i suspect because learning hebrew means learning spoken israeli hebrew which is a language that was standardized and revived 150 years ago and has only been spo

i suspect because learning hebrew means learning spoken israeli hebrew which is a language that was standardized and revived 150 years ago and has only been spoken since then by less than 10 million people so it did not have time to accumulate weird exceptions like arabic. learning hebrew to be able to understand medieval or biblical literature probably is a good bit harder than learning modern hebrew.

ars 9y ago
> learning hebrew to be able to understand medieval or biblical literature probably is a good bit harder than learning modern hebrew. No it's not. A non-fluent Hebrew speaker would not even be able to tell the difference between the modern and biblical. It's the same words, the same word order, the same letters, pronunciation (modern abbreviates sounds a bit, but the abbreviation is more slang than official - if you ask someone to speak slowly then the pronunciation is the same in both). You'd have to be pretty fluent in Hebrew to even be able to identify where there are differences (mainly in knowing which words are considered archaic, and some sentence structure that is not common in modern Hebrew). But to actually know those details requires a deep knowledge of the language - a beginner speaker would never be able to tell the difference. For all intents and purposes it's all one language. It's not like English where middle English is basically unintelligible. There are tons of people who only ever learned the biblical Hebrew, and they can speak to people who only know modern Hebrew - they sound a bit funny, but that's about it. A beginner speaker would never notice. > so it did not have time to accumulate weird exceptions There's been plenty of time, but it hardly happened for a different reasons: The language is basically defined by the Torah and the Mishnah (and other bodies of work). The way it's written there is definitive. So it's difficult to create exceptions when you have so much written literature that does it in a particular way. A notable exception is uncommon and technical words, which have definitely changed over time - but a beginner is never going to encounter those.
- iskander 9y ago
  >A non-fluent Hebrew speaker would not even be able to tell the difference between the modern and biblical. As a non-fluent Hebrew speaker who took ~10 years of Hebrew classes as a kid, this seems totally untrue. Biblical Hebrew is intensely weird. It doesn't use the same word order (VSO vs. modern SVO). There are differences in grammatical system that, if you don't know about them, make it look like past and future tense are reversed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waw-consecutive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waw-consecutive). The vocabulary is more limited but the words get used in a wider range of meanings. Random example, Genesis 2:15: וַיִּקַּח יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים, אֶת-הָאָדָם; וַיַּנִּחֵהוּ בְגַן-עֵדֶן, לְעָבְדָהּ וּלְשָׁמְרָהּ. If you wrote in anything resembling this style it would be only to make allusion to the Bible.
  - ars 9y ago
    If you wrote that in modern Hebrew the only change would be putting וַיִּקַּח after God's name instead of before, and maybe the הּ in the last two words, and in וַיַּנִּחֵהוּ would be replaced with a word instead of a letter. A fluent speaker would know, I'm not arguing that. But a beginner? They'll hardly get it right in the first place - they won't be able to tell which dialect it is. My point is not that there's no difference, it's that the difference is minor in the context of language change.
    - iskander 9y ago
      "Hashem vayikach" is gibberish in modern Hebrew though. You'd have to change it to something like "lakach". In modern Hebrew it would be something like "Hashem lakach ha'adam v'sam oto b'gan Eden..." The grammar required for "vayikach" to make sense is missing in modern Hebrew, which I remember being confusing even in elementary school. This isn't a niche case since a huge fraction of the Bible uses verbs like "vayomer". Also, the end of the sentence, while comprehensible, still feels very archaic. I don't think biblical Hebrew qualifies as an entirely separate language but I do think even beginners almost immediately sense the differences. It's like comparing modern English with Shakespearean English. Lastly, a note on pronunciation: the language used to span a huge phonemic range (roughly the same as Arabic), but we ended up dropping like a third of the sounds. So, sure, modern pronunciation of biblical Hebrew sounds like modern Hebrew. But that's kinda tautological.
- poisonarena 9y ago
  > No it's not. A non-fluent Hebrew speaker would not even be able to tell the difference between the modern and biblical. This is not true at all

ars 9y ago

> learning hebrew to be able to understand medieval or biblical literature probably is a good bit harder than learning modern hebrew. No it's not. A non-fluent Hebrew speaker would not even be able to tell the difference between the modern and biblical. It's the same words, the same word order, the same letters, pronunciation (modern abbreviates sounds a bit, but the abbreviation is more slang than official - if you ask someone to speak slowly then the pronunciation is the same in both). You'd have to be pretty fluent in Hebrew to even be able to identify where there are differences (mainly in knowing which words are considered archaic, and some sentence structure that is not common in modern Hebrew). But to actually know those details requires a deep knowledge of the language - a beginner speaker would never be able to tell the difference. For all intents and purposes it's all one language. It's not like English where middle English is basically unintelligible. There are tons of people who only ever learned the biblical Hebrew, and they can speak to people who only know modern Hebrew - they sound a bit funny, but that's about it. A beginner speaker would never notice. > so it did not have time to accumulate weird exceptions There's been plenty of time, but it hardly happened for a different reasons: The language is basically defined by the Torah and the Mishnah (and other bodies of work). The way it's written there is definitive. So it's difficult to create exceptions when you have so much written literature that does it in a particular way. A notable exception is uncommon and technical words, which have definitely changed over time - but a beginner is never going to encounter those.

iskander 9y ago
>A non-fluent Hebrew speaker would not even be able to tell the difference between the modern and biblical. As a non-fluent Hebrew speaker who took ~10 years of Hebrew classes as a kid, this seems totally untrue. Biblical Hebrew is intensely weird. It doesn't use the same word order (VSO vs. modern SVO). There are differences in grammatical system that, if you don't know about them, make it look like past and future tense are reversed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waw-consecutive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waw-consecutive). The vocabulary is more limited but the words get used in a wider range of meanings. Random example, Genesis 2:15: וַיִּקַּח יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים, אֶת-הָאָדָם; וַיַּנִּחֵהוּ בְגַן-עֵדֶן, לְעָבְדָהּ וּלְשָׁמְרָהּ. If you wrote in anything resembling this style it would be only to make allusion to the Bible.
- ars 9y ago
  If you wrote that in modern Hebrew the only change would be putting וַיִּקַּח after God's name instead of before, and maybe the הּ in the last two words, and in וַיַּנִּחֵהוּ would be replaced with a word instead of a letter. A fluent speaker would know, I'm not arguing that. But a beginner? They'll hardly get it right in the first place - they won't be able to tell which dialect it is. My point is not that there's no difference, it's that the difference is minor in the context of language change.
  - iskander 9y ago
    "Hashem vayikach" is gibberish in modern Hebrew though. You'd have to change it to something like "lakach". In modern Hebrew it would be something like "Hashem lakach ha'adam v'sam oto b'gan Eden..." The grammar required for "vayikach" to make sense is missing in modern Hebrew, which I remember being confusing even in elementary school. This isn't a niche case since a huge fraction of the Bible uses verbs like "vayomer". Also, the end of the sentence, while comprehensible, still feels very archaic. I don't think biblical Hebrew qualifies as an entirely separate language but I do think even beginners almost immediately sense the differences. It's like comparing modern English with Shakespearean English. Lastly, a note on pronunciation: the language used to span a huge phonemic range (roughly the same as Arabic), but we ended up dropping like a third of the sounds. So, sure, modern pronunciation of biblical Hebrew sounds like modern Hebrew. But that's kinda tautological.
poisonarena 9y ago
> No it's not. A non-fluent Hebrew speaker would not even be able to tell the difference between the modern and biblical. This is not true at all