http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semit...
Wikipedia is so cool when you're in need of a quick study on things. I was like, "Who or what were the Ugarit?" Now I know! We're talking Syria here, Ugarit was a location in Syria. We are also apparently indebted to cuneiform writing for our letter "Q" - that little flag that hangs off the bottom originated with a stick!
Discussion Topic
Languages of the Old Testament World - PT 2
Posted on 05/30/08, 12:27 pm
Part 2
1. Ugaritic: This language has significantly improved our understanding of the Hebrew grammar and vocabulary. It too was a northwestern Semitic language closely related to Hebrew and similiar to the language of the Canaanites (by comparison, Akkadian was a northeastern Semitic language and somewhat more distant Hebrew). Ugaritic employed an alphabetic cuneiform(i.e., used cuneiform signs to represent individual letters) and is preserved in approximately 1,300 administrative, economic and religious documents from the fourteenth to the thirteenth centuries B.C.
2. Aramaic: This language spans at least the last 3,000 years of the Old Testament period. Like Hebrew and Ugaritic, it was a northwestern Semitic language. Aramaic utilized a 22 letter alphabet borrowed from the Phoenician Language. It became the international language of communication for the Assyrians, Babylonians and Persians during the first millennium B.C. The Persian Empire's "standardized" Aramaic has been dubbed Imperial Aramaic - the dialect of the governmental communique in Ezra 4. The books of Ezra and Daniel were partially written in Aramaic, and traces of Aramaic are scattered throughout the Old Testament.
3.Hebrew: Hebrew uses the same alphabet as Aramaic. Attested outside of the Bible from the tenth century B.C., it was the language of the Israelites and of most of the Old Testament. Although the present Old Testament is primarily rendered in a standard Biblical Hebrew, traces of ancient Hebrew dialects are apparent in the text (e.g., Jdg 12:6) During the intertestamental period Aramaic gradually replaced Hebrew as the spoken language of the Jews (Jesus spoke Aramaic, e.g., MT 27:46). A modern version of Hebrew is spoken by Israelis today, but it has a number of substantial differences from the classical form.
Taken from page 672 in the Archaeological Study Bible
1. Ugaritic: This language has significantly improved our understanding of the Hebrew grammar and vocabulary. It too was a northwestern Semitic language closely related to Hebrew and similiar to the language of the Canaanites (by comparison, Akkadian was a northeastern Semitic language and somewhat more distant Hebrew). Ugaritic employed an alphabetic cuneiform(i.e., used cuneiform signs to represent individual letters) and is preserved in approximately 1,300 administrative, economic and religious documents from the fourteenth to the thirteenth centuries B.C.
2. Aramaic: This language spans at least the last 3,000 years of the Old Testament period. Like Hebrew and Ugaritic, it was a northwestern Semitic language. Aramaic utilized a 22 letter alphabet borrowed from the Phoenician Language. It became the international language of communication for the Assyrians, Babylonians and Persians during the first millennium B.C. The Persian Empire's "standardized" Aramaic has been dubbed Imperial Aramaic - the dialect of the governmental communique in Ezra 4. The books of Ezra and Daniel were partially written in Aramaic, and traces of Aramaic are scattered throughout the Old Testament.
3.Hebrew: Hebrew uses the same alphabet as Aramaic. Attested outside of the Bible from the tenth century B.C., it was the language of the Israelites and of most of the Old Testament. Although the present Old Testament is primarily rendered in a standard Biblical Hebrew, traces of ancient Hebrew dialects are apparent in the text (e.g., Jdg 12:6) During the intertestamental period Aramaic gradually replaced Hebrew as the spoken language of the Jews (Jesus spoke Aramaic, e.g., MT 27:46). A modern version of Hebrew is spoken by Israelis today, but it has a number of substantial differences from the classical form.
Taken from page 672 in the Archaeological Study Bible
-
Reply #1 05/30/08 1:22pm
-
Reply #2 05/30/08 1:54pm
Thank you!!! That is a cool bit of information! -
Reply #3 11/10/09 12:21pm
Great info.!
Welcome
Join This Group
The mission of this group is to provide a place to learn about ancient places and their history.Biblical studies may accompany archaeological discussions as they pertain to the Bible. Please refrain from any negativity as this should be place of positive reinforcement of our love for our Lord, Jesus Christ! May we all become God's ambassadors and embrace our differences through love and understanding. Thank you!





