Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S

Expand Messages
  • Brian Colless
    ... been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש ( Don t do. )
    Message 1 of 21 , Oct 31, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Yitzhak Sapir said:
      >What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
      been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
      ("Don't
      do.") <

      On 'A L T ` ´S as "Do not do"
      What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
      "Do not make [a pesel]"

      Yes, I had said the L was B, but an example of B is probably found
      further along on the first line; I have been considering it as E (h).
      The B as a square or simply three sides of a square is attested, but
      this sign is more rounded.

      That form (a semi-circle) is the shape of L on the El-Khadr arrowheads;
      on the unprovenanced Grossman cylinder seal, in the name Sh B L ;
      on the Gezer jars, though also with with a long stem;
      but not on the Izbet Sarta ostracon.

      > a Lamed whose top has been cut off <
      What I have said makes this supposition unnecessary; but the `ayin
      (circle with dot) might have lost its bottom, sorry, top, through a
      breakage, and the same could apply to the L.

      So, the one standing out on line 3 might be L, or else G or P.

      But P is what I see on line 2, preceding the Tet, with a Sh/S like the
      one you show on line 1.
      I am fairly sure that the sequence is Sh P Tt ($pt.) there, 'judge',
      not MMTt.

      If we really have the sequence 'A L it could be "not", but the first
      choice must always be "El/God", and 'LT would be "Elat/Goddess" =
      Asherah)"! Hence "The Goddess has made ... " or "The Goddess
      `Ash[tart] (Astarte)". Oh, those naughty Israelites!

      But I will be very disappointed if this sherd merely contains a list
      of names, unless they include the king's name!

      Right, then, I will not have much more to say, until we get a clear
      photograph, showing all of the 4 dozen letters on the sherd, with no
      disembodied hand crawling over it (shades of EA Poe).

      Brian Colless
      Massey U, NZ

      On 31/10/2008, at 7:31 PM, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:

      > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 5:52 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
      >
      > > It is not an abagadary, apparently running 'A B T `ayin (circle with
      > > dot) ....
      > > Is the E (h) the definite article? Is its stance E or |_|_|
      > > (reflecting its origin as a person with upraised arms)?
      >
      > What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
      > been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
      > ("Don't
      > do.")
      >
      > Yitzhak Sapir
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Yitzhak Sapir
      ... Dear Brian, I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has the qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary
      Message 2 of 21 , Nov 1, 2008
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
        > Yitzhak Sapir said:
        > >What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
        > been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
        > ("Don't
        > do.") <
        >
        > On 'A L T ` ´S as "Do not do"
        > What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
        > "Do not make [a pesel]"

        Dear Brian,

        I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has the
        qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary photographs,
        and at this point, apparently, this is not even sufficient for trying
        to read more
        than a handful of words. Those letters there on the second line may be the
        ones Haggai Misgav reads as "judge" -- I don't know where the word "judge"
        appears. I feel that the Sin on the first line has only two < marks, whereas
        the ones I identified as Mem on the second line have three or four (and the
        second has them going >). I did this because I realized that the words
        "Don't do" are legible on the photo, and also because someone asked how
        the Proto-Canaanite forms are substantiated in the photo. Again, I did not
        mean to second-guess Haggai Misgav in his reading and if he, with all the
        information he has available is not willing to go much further, we shouldn't
        either.

        Yitzhak Sapir
      • victor avigdor hurowitz
        Yitzhaq, In the versions of the Ten Commandments I know, the negative is Lo and not Al. Victor Hurowitz BGU ... Dear Brian, I did not mean to second guess
        Message 3 of 21 , Nov 1, 2008
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Yitzhaq,
          In the versions of the Ten Commandments I know, the negative is Lo and not
          Al.
          Victor Hurowitz
          BGU



          On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:

          > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
          > Yitzhak Sapir said:
          > >What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
          > been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
          > ("Don't
          > do.") <
          >
          > On 'A L T ` ´S as "Do not do"
          > What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
          > "Do not make [a pesel]"

          Dear Brian,

          I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has the
          qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary photographs,
          and at this point, apparently, this is not even sufficient for trying
          to read more
          than a handful of words. Those letters there on the second line may be the
          ones Haggai Misgav reads as "judge" -- I don't know where the word "judge"
          appears. I feel that the Sin on the first line has only two < marks, whereas
          the ones I identified as Mem on the second line have three or four (and the
          second has them going >). I did this because I realized that the words
          "Don't do" are legible on the photo, and also because someone asked how
          the Proto-Canaanite forms are substantiated in the photo. Again, I did not
          mean to second-guess Haggai Misgav in his reading and if he, with all the
          information he has available is not willing to go much further, we shouldn't
          either.

          Yitzhak Sapir
        • Ariel L. Szczupak
          ... Exactly. The photographs I ve seen on the web are FAR from a quality that would allow any serious interpretation. Especially if significant data is
          Message 4 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            At 02:14 AM 11/2/2008, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:

            >On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
            > > Yitzhak Sapir said:
            > > >What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
            > > been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
            > > ("Don't
            > > do.") <
            > >
            > > On 'A L T ` ´S as "Do not do"
            > > What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
            > > "Do not make [a pesel]"
            >
            >Dear Brian,
            >
            >I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has the
            >qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary photographs,
            >and at this point, apparently, this is not even sufficient for trying
            >to read more than a handful of words.

            Exactly. The photographs I've seen on the web are FAR from a quality
            that would allow any serious interpretation. Especially if
            significant data is revealed only with the use of a special
            (spectrographic?) camera. As much as I understand the urge to try and
            "read" the inscription from the web photos, feeling the itch myself
            (a very late instance of proto script coupled with a very early
            instance of BH forms, in a dateable context - amazing!), these photos
            are illustrative, period.

            And a thought, given the condition of the ostracon - the usual
            practices of sherd cleaning in digs (hard bristled brushes, water)
            may have to be re-thought, though systematic dry cleaning with soft
            brushes is somewhat of a logistical nightmare considering the number
            of sherds dug out each day.



            Ariel.

            [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

            ---
            Ariel L. Szczupak
            AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
            POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
            Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
            ane.als@...
            ---
            http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/
            http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/
          • Ariel L. Szczupak
            ... There s an al taas in the Abraham/Isaac story somewhere and several in later books [don t have refs at hand] ... Ariel. [100% bona fide dilettante ...
            Message 5 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              At 08:09 AM 11/2/2008, victor avigdor hurowitz wrote:
              >Yitzhaq,
              >In the versions of the Ten Commandments I know, the negative is Lo and not
              >Al.

              There's an "al taas" in the Abraham/Isaac story somewhere and several
              in later books [don't have refs at hand]

              >Victor Hurowitz
              >BGU
              >
              >
              >
              >On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
              >
              > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
              > > Yitzhak Sapir said:
              > > >What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
              > > been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
              > > ("Don't
              > > do.") <
              > >
              > > On 'A L T ` ´S as "Do not do"
              > > What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
              > > "Do not make [a pesel]"
              >
              >Dear Brian,
              >
              >I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has the
              >qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary photographs,
              >and at this point, apparently, this is not even sufficient for trying
              >to read more
              >than a handful of words. Those letters there on the second line may be the
              >ones Haggai Misgav reads as "judge" -- I don't know where the word "judge"
              >appears. I feel that the Sin on the first line has only two < marks, whereas
              >the ones I identified as Mem on the second line have three or four (and the
              >second has them going >). I did this because I realized that the words
              >"Don't do" are legible on the photo, and also because someone asked how
              >the Proto-Canaanite forms are substantiated in the photo. Again, I did not
              >mean to second-guess Haggai Misgav in his reading and if he, with all the
              >information he has available is not willing to go much further, we shouldn't
              >either.
              >
              >Yitzhak Sapir
              >
              >
              >------------------------------------
              >
              >Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              Ariel.

              [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

              ---
              Ariel L. Szczupak
              AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
              POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
              Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
              ane.als@...
              ---
              http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/
              http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/
            • victor
              There may be some ‘al ta`aseh but NOT in the Decalogue! Genesis 22:12 which you refer to is not in the Ten Commandments. BTW, a very quick look at Mandelkern
              Message 6 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                There may be some ‘al ta`aseh but NOT in the Decalogue! Genesis 22:12 which you refer to is not in the Ten Commandments.

                BTW, a very quick look at Mandelkern gives me only two more cases: al ta`asu et hannebalah hazot in Judges 19:23 and al ta`aseh et hannebalah hazot in II Sam 13:12. Interesting! (although I’m checking very quickly)

                Victor Hurowitz

                BGU

                _____

                From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ariel L. Szczupak
                Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:38 AM
                To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S



                At 08:09 AM 11/2/2008, victor avigdor hurowitz wrote:
                >Yitzhaq,
                >In the versions of the Ten Commandments I know, the negative is Lo and not
                >Al.

                There's an "al taas" in the Abraham/Isaac story somewhere and several
                in later books [don't have refs at hand]

                >Victor Hurowitz
                >BGU
                >
                >
                >
                >On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
                >
                > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
                > > Yitzhak Sapir said:
                > > >What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
                > > been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
                > > ("Don't
                > > do.") <
                > >
                > > On 'A L T ` ´S as "Do not do"
                > > What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
                > > "Do not make [a pesel]"
                >
                >Dear Brian,
                >
                >I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has the
                >qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary photographs,
                >and at this point, apparently, this is not even sufficient for trying
                >to read more
                >than a handful of words. Those letters there on the second line may be the
                >ones Haggai Misgav reads as "judge" -- I don't know where the word "judge"
                >appears. I feel that the Sin on the first line has only two < marks, whereas
                >the ones I identified as Mem on the second line have three or four (and the
                >second has them going >). I did this because I realized that the words
                >"Don't do" are legible on the photo, and also because someone asked how
                >the Proto-Canaanite forms are substantiated in the photo. Again, I did not
                >mean to second-guess Haggai Misgav in his reading and if he, with all the
                >information he has available is not willing to go much further, we shouldn't
                >either.
                >
                >Yitzhak Sapir
                >
                >
                >------------------------------------
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                Ariel.

                [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

                ---
                Ariel L. Szczupak
                AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
                POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
                Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
                ane.als@gmail. <mailto:ane.als%40gmail.com> com
                ---
                http://yvetteszczup <http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/> akthomas.blogspot.com/
                http://undiamantbru <http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/> t.blogspot.com/





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Ariel L. Szczupak
                ... Of course not. We all know the decalogue is in the Jacob & ladder story, not the Abraham/Isaac one. [ :) ] ... For )L T($ I find also Jer 39:12, Jer
                Message 7 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  At 09:49 AM 11/2/2008, victor wrote:

                  >There may be some ‘al ta`aseh but NOT in the Decalogue! Genesis
                  >22:12 which you refer to is not in the Ten Commandments.

                  Of course not. We all know the decalogue is in the Jacob & ladder
                  story, not the Abraham/Isaac one. [ :) ]


                  >BTW, a very quick look at Mandelkern gives me only two more cases:
                  >al ta`asu et hannebalah hazot in Judges 19:23 and al ta`aseh et
                  >hannebalah hazot in II Sam 13:12. Interesting! (although I’m
                  >checking very quickly)

                  For ")L T($" I find also Jer 39:12, Jer 40:16, Job 13:20

                  For ")L T($W" I find also Gen 19:8, Jer 5:10

                  Also ")L Y($W" at Ex 36:6

                  And maybe the fancy camera will reveal it's actually ")L T($N" ...



                  Ariel.

                  [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

                  ---
                  Ariel L. Szczupak
                  AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
                  POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
                  Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
                  ane.als@...
                  ---
                  http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/
                  http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/
                • Niels Peter Lemche
                  Ariel, Either you are pulling our legs or you have to do some reading of the Hebrew Bible. In the first case nothing to say, in the last case the Decalogue is
                  Message 8 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Ariel,
                    Either you are pulling our legs or you have to do some reading of the Hebrew Bible. In the first case nothing to say, in the last case the Decalogue is in Exod 21 and Dtn 5.

                    Shouldn't be necessary to say this

                    Niels Peter Lemche

                    -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                    Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af Ariel L. Szczupak
                    Sendt: den 2 november 2008 12:28
                    Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                    Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S

                    At 09:49 AM 11/2/2008, victor wrote:

                    >There may be some ‘al ta`aseh but NOT in the Decalogue! Genesis
                    >22:12 which you refer to is not in the Ten Commandments.

                    Of course not. We all know the decalogue is in the Jacob & ladder
                    story, not the Abraham/Isaac one. [ :) ]


                    >BTW, a very quick look at Mandelkern gives me only two more cases:
                    >al ta`asu et hannebalah hazot in Judges 19:23 and al ta`aseh et
                    >hannebalah hazot in II Sam 13:12. Interesting! (although I’m
                    >checking very quickly)
                  • victor
                    I think Ariel is indeed joking after I called him on his first inaccuracy. Victor Hurowitz BGU _____ From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com]
                    Message 9 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I think Ariel is indeed joking after I called him on his first inaccuracy.

                      Victor Hurowitz

                      BGU



                      _____

                      From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Niels Peter Lemche
                      Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:38 PM
                      To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: SV: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S



                      Ariel,
                      Either you are pulling our legs or you have to do some reading of the Hebrew Bible. In the first case nothing to say, in the last case the Decalogue is in Exod 21 and Dtn 5.

                      Shouldn't be necessary to say this

                      Niels Peter Lemche

                      -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                      Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com] På vegne af Ariel L. Szczupak
                      Sendt: den 2 november 2008 12:28
                      Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
                      Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S

                      At 09:49 AM 11/2/2008, victor wrote:

                      >There may be some ‘al ta`aseh but NOT in the Decalogue! Genesis
                      >22:12 which you refer to is not in the Ten Commandments.

                      Of course not. We all know the decalogue is in the Jacob & ladder
                      story, not the Abraham/Isaac one. [ :) ]


                      >BTW, a very quick look at Mandelkern gives me only two more cases:
                      >al ta`asu et hannebalah hazot in Judges 19:23 and al ta`aseh et
                      >hannebalah hazot in II Sam 13:12. Interesting! (although I’m
                      >checking very quickly)





                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Niels Peter Lemche
                      Dear Victor Let s pray for that! Niels Peter Lemche ... Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af victor Sendt: den 2 november
                      Message 10 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dear Victor

                        Let's pray for that!

                        Niels Peter Lemche

                        -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                        Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af victor
                        Sendt: den 2 november 2008 12:41
                        Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                        Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S

                        I think Ariel is indeed joking after I called him on his first inaccuracy.

                        Victor Hurowitz

                        BGU
                      • Ariel L. Szczupak
                        ... I did put a smiley there ... More in general, everyone who has gone through the Israeli education system, even in its present sorry state, would know that
                        Message 11 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          At 01:38 PM 11/2/2008, Niels Peter Lemche wrote:

                          >Ariel,
                          >Either you are pulling our legs or you have to do some reading of
                          >the Hebrew Bible. In the first case nothing to say, in the last case
                          >the Decalogue is in Exod 21 and Dtn 5.
                          >
                          >Shouldn't be necessary to say this

                          I did put a smiley there ...

                          More in general, everyone who has gone through the Israeli education
                          system, even in its present sorry state, would know that the
                          prohibitive commandments start with "L)" (/lo/), not with ")L" (/al/).

                          As for people using translations, it's always a good idea to check
                          the Strong numbers of the actual words used in specific passages (and
                          there are plenty of web sites which provide those). That would reduce
                          confusion between, e.g., ")L" (Strong 408) and "L)" (Strong 3808).

                          But I do have to accept blame for not adding a smiley to my last
                          sentence in that message, ")L T($N" referring to the well known
                          addiction of Iron Age youth, smoking olive pits in bongs. :) <--- smiley.


                          >Niels Peter Lemche
                          >
                          >-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                          >Fra: <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                          >[mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] PÃ¥ vegne af Ariel L. Szczupak
                          >Sendt: den 2 november 2008 12:28
                          >Til: <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                          >Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S
                          >
                          >At 09:49 AM 11/2/2008, victor wrote:
                          >
                          > >There may be some ‘al ta`aseh but NOT in the Decalologue! Genesis
                          > >22:12 which you refer to is not in the Ten Commandments.
                          >
                          >Of course not. We all know the decalogue is in the Jacob & ladder
                          >story, not the Abraham/Isaac one. [ :) ]
                          >
                          >
                          > >BTW, a very quick look at Mandelkern gives me only two more cases:
                          > >al ta`asu et hannebalah hazot in Judges 19:23 and al ta`aseh et
                          > >hannebalah hazot in II Sam 13:12. Interesting! (although I’m
                          > >checking very quickly)
                          >
                          >

                          Ariel.

                          [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

                          ---
                          Ariel L. Szczupak
                          AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
                          POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
                          Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
                          ane.als@...
                          ---
                          http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/
                          http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/
                        • victor
                          I must take issue with Ariel’s comment here about the Israeli school system and the average Israeli’s knowledge of Hebrew. Many years ago I tacked a sign
                          Message 12 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I must take issue with Ariel’s comment here about the Israeli school system and the average Israeli’s knowledge of Hebrew. Many years ago I tacked a sign on an office computer reading “Lo tiga` bammahshev!” (Thou shalt not touch the computer!), rather than the expected “al tiga bammahshev”, and wouldn’t you know it if our department secretary didn’t try to correct it. Obviously she is ignorant of the Ten Commandments. Fact of the matter is that prohibitive commands are not expressed with lo but with al. Ariel, do you tell your children “lo tesaheq barehov”, or “al tesaheq barehov”?

                            Victor Hurowitz

                            BGU



                            _____

                            From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ariel L. Szczupak
                            Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 2:01 PM
                            To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: Re: SV: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S



                            At 01:38 PM 11/2/2008, Niels Peter Lemche wrote:

                            >Ariel,
                            >Either you are pulling our legs or you have to do some reading of
                            >the Hebrew Bible. In the first case nothing to say, in the last case
                            >the Decalogue is in Exod 21 and Dtn 5.
                            >
                            >Shouldn't be necessary to say this

                            I did put a smiley there ...

                            More in general, everyone who has gone through the Israeli education
                            system, even in its present sorry state, would know that the
                            prohibitive commandments start with "L)" (/lo/), not with ")L" (/al/).

                            As for people using translations, it's always a good idea to check
                            the Strong numbers of the actual words used in specific passages (and
                            there are plenty of web sites which provide those). That would reduce
                            confusion between, e.g., ")L" (Strong 408) and "L)" (Strong 3808).

                            But I do have to accept blame for not adding a smiley to my last
                            sentence in that message, ")L T($N" referring to the well known
                            addiction of Iron Age youth, smoking olive pits in bongs. :) <--- smiley.

                            >Niels Peter Lemche
                            >
                            >-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                            >Fra: <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
                            >[mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com] PÃ¥ vegne af Ariel L. Szczupak
                            >Sendt: den 2 november 2008 12:28
                            >Til: <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
                            >Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S
                            >
                            >At 09:49 AM 11/2/2008, victor wrote:
                            >
                            > >There may be some ‘al ta`aseh but NOT in the Decalologue! Genesis
                            > >22:12 which you refer to is not in the Ten Commandments.
                            >
                            >Of course not. We all know the decalogue is in the Jacob & ladder
                            >story, not the Abraham/Isaac one. [ :) ]
                            >
                            >
                            > >BTW, a very quick look at Mandelkern gives me only two more cases:
                            > >al ta`asu et hannebalah hazot in Judges 19:23 and al ta`aseh et
                            > >hannebalah hazot in II Sam 13:12. Interesting! (although I’m
                            > >checking very quickly)
                            >
                            >

                            Ariel.

                            [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

                            ---
                            Ariel L. Szczupak
                            AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
                            POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
                            Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
                            ane.als@gmail. <mailto:ane.als%40gmail.com> com
                            ---
                            http://yvetteszczup <http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/> akthomas.blogspot.com/
                            http://undiamantbru <http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/> t.blogspot.com/





                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Niels Peter Lemche
                            Hm, are we not back to the old division in biblical Hebrew between lo & imperfect and al & jussiv? More to it than that? Modern Hebrew usage is probably of
                            Message 13 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hm, are we not back to the old division in biblical Hebrew between lo' & imperfect and 'al & jussiv? More to it than that? Modern Hebrew usage is probably of no consequence here.

                              Back to old Alt (need a smiley here): lo' & imperfect a categorical demand, "thou shall not etc", 'al & jussiv less categorical: "Please, do not ..." I know that I am back in the Jurasic Park of biblical scholarship.

                              Niels Peter Lemche



                              -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                              Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af victor
                              Sendt: den 2 november 2008 13:10
                              Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                              Emne: RE: SV: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S

                              I must take issue with Ariel's comment here about the Israeli school system and the average Israeli's knowledge of Hebrew. Many years ago I tacked a sign on an office computer reading "Lo tiga` bammahshev!" (Thou shalt not touch the computer!), rather than the expected "al tiga bammahshev", and wouldn't you know it if our department secretary didn't try to correct it. Obviously she is ignorant of the Ten Commandments. Fact of the matter is that prohibitive commands are not expressed with lo but with al. Ariel, do you tell your children "lo tesaheq barehov", or "al tesaheq barehov"?

                              Victor Hurowitz

                              BGU
                            • victor
                              Nothing wrong with reverting back to old Alt if he has something new to say, or even old that’s right. I wouldn’t venture an opinion on what he says in
                              Message 14 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Nothing wrong with reverting back to old Alt if he has something new to say,
                                or even old that’s right.

                                I wouldn’t venture an opinion on what he says in this particular case
                                because I don’t have his article in front of me, but is it is as you state
                                it, it requires a small bit of modification. Look at Exodus 23:1 and 7 where
                                al is used in negative commands which are certainly categorical. But in
                                these cases the al is a secondary prohibition subsumed under a primary
                                prohibition mentioned right before them which uses lo.

                                Victor

                                BGU



                                _____

                                From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                Niels Peter Lemche
                                Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 2:17 PM
                                To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: SV: SV: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S



                                Hm, are we not back to the old division in biblical Hebrew between lo' &
                                imperfect and 'al & jussiv? More to it than that? Modern Hebrew usage is
                                probably of no consequence here.

                                Back to old Alt (need a smiley here): lo' & imperfect a categorical demand,
                                "thou shall not etc", 'al & jussiv less categorical: "Please, do not ..." I
                                know that I am back in the Jurasic Park of biblical scholarship.

                                Niels Peter Lemche

                                -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                                Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
                                [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com] På vegne af
                                victor
                                Sendt: den 2 november 2008 13:10
                                Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
                                Emne: RE: SV: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S

                                I must take issue with Ariel's comment here about the Israeli school system
                                and the average Israeli's knowledge of Hebrew. Many years ago I tacked a
                                sign on an office computer reading "Lo tiga` bammahshev!" (Thou shalt not
                                touch the computer!), rather than the expected "al tiga bammahshev", and
                                wouldn't you know it if our department secretary didn't try to correct it.
                                Obviously she is ignorant of the Ten Commandments. Fact of the matter is
                                that prohibitive commands are not expressed with lo but with al. Ariel, do
                                you tell your children "lo tesaheq barehov", or "al tesaheq barehov"?

                                Victor Hurowitz

                                BGU





                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Brian Colless
                                Victor That is exactly why I was careful to say a new version And now the discussion has started raging over lo (thou shalt not) and al (which I had
                                Message 15 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Victor
                                  That is exactly why I was careful to say "a new version"

                                  And now the discussion has started raging over lo' (thou shalt not)
                                  and 'al (which I had thought implied Please do not or Kindly refrain
                                  from in classical usage).

                                  I will respond to Yitzhak Sapir tomorrow.

                                  Brian
                                  1.33 am on Monday 3rd of Novemeber, I think; my luakh says 5 Kheshvan
                                  5769

                                  On 2/11/2008, at 7:09 PM, victor avigdor hurowitz wrote:

                                  > Yitzhaq,
                                  > In the versions of the Ten Commandments I know, the negative is Lo
                                  > and not
                                  > Al.
                                  > Victor Hurowitz
                                  > BGU
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
                                  >
                                  >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
                                  >> Yitzhak Sapir said:
                                  >>> What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
                                  >> been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of אל תעש
                                  >> ("Don't
                                  >> do.") <
                                  >>
                                  >> On 'A L T ` ´S as "Do not do"
                                  >> What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
                                  >> "Do not make [a pesel]"
                                  >
                                  > Dear Brian,
                                  >
                                  > I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has
                                  > the
                                  > qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary
                                  > photographs,
                                  > and at this point, apparently, this is not even sufficient for trying
                                  > to read more
                                  > than a handful of words. Those letters there on the second line may
                                  > be the
                                  > ones Haggai Misgav reads as "judge" -- I don't know where the word
                                  > "judge"
                                  > appears. I feel that the Sin on the first line has only two <
                                  > marks, whereas
                                  > the ones I identified as Mem on the second line have three or four
                                  > (and the
                                  > second has them going >). I did this because I realized that the
                                  > words
                                  > "Don't do" are legible on the photo, and also because someone asked
                                  > how
                                  > the Proto-Canaanite forms are substantiated in the photo. Again, I
                                  > did not
                                  > mean to second-guess Haggai Misgav in his reading and if he, with
                                  > all the
                                  > information he has available is not willing to go much further, we
                                  > shouldn't
                                  > either.
                                  >
                                  > Yitzhak Sapir
                                  >
                                  >
                                • Niels Peter Lemche
                                  I am quite sure that the Germans were able to get around both cases. The first might be secondary in comparison to the one opening the sentence, the second
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I am quite sure that the Germans were able to get around both cases. The first might be secondary in comparison to the one opening the sentence, the second might not necessarily be understood as categorical.

                                    I checked a modern translation:

                                    Revised English Bible: You must not spread a baseless rumour, nor make common cause with a wicked man ... 7: Avoid all lies, and do not cause the death of ...

                                    V. 8 opens with perhaps a better example.

                                    Would have nothing against a modern study of negations. In my time, if we failed to make the distinction between 'al and lo' at the examination, we were dead meat!

                                    Niels Peter Lemche


                                    -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
                                    Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af victor
                                    Sendt: den 2 november 2008 13:27
                                    Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                                    Emne: RE: SV: [ANE-2] Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S

                                    Nothing wrong with reverting back to old Alt if he has something new to say,
                                    or even old that's right.

                                    I wouldn't venture an opinion on what he says in this particular case
                                    because I don't have his article in front of me, but is it is as you state
                                    it, it requires a small bit of modification. Look at Exodus 23:1 and 7 where
                                    al is used in negative commands which are certainly categorical. But in
                                    these cases the al is a secondary prohibition subsumed under a primary
                                    prohibition mentioned right before them which uses lo.

                                    Victor

                                    BGU



                                    _____
                                  • Andrés Piquer Otero
                                    Personally I would reconsider the traditional clause-level theories from a discourse analysis perspective: the two instances of the Decalogues could be
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                                    View Source
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Personally I would reconsider the traditional clause-level theories from
                                      a discourse analysis perspective: the two instances of the Decalogues
                                      could be analyzed not as Hortative Discourse (command-driven) but as
                                      Predictive Discourse (rendering of prospective-future events). That
                                      would fit with a 2-mode division (indicative vs. injunctive) akin to
                                      proposals applied to the PC in Ugaritic. The Decalogues are not a piece
                                      of "injunctive" discourse, but a text in the "indicative mode". Thus,
                                      interpretation of lo' + "imperfect" as a categorical demand vs. the
                                      default negative command with 'al + jussive is to be contextualized in
                                      the form and function of the whole text. These two particular instances
                                      of juridical-function discourse use indicative (predictive discourse),
                                      as opposed to injunctive. Perhaps that's indeed connected to the
                                      "categorical" force of legal language (as attested in the tense use in
                                      multiple languages, old and modern), but it is created by the context
                                      usage in a text-type, not by the existence of yet another category of
                                      single-sentence construction (we already see enough of those in
                                      classical Hebrew grammars). In the Decalogues, it is remarkable that the
                                      few positive commands are problematic: kabbed supports an infinitive
                                      reading besides the imp. one and zakor is vocalized as infinitive, so
                                      also in the positive commands the imperative form (injunctive mode)
                                      could be missing. Further research could focus on this context-based
                                      line in other instances of legal texts presented from injuctive vs.
                                      indicative modes.

                                      Andrés Piquer Otero



                                      Niels Peter Lemche wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Hm, are we not back to the old division in biblical Hebrew between lo'
                                      > & imperfect and 'al & jussiv? More to it than that? Modern Hebrew
                                      > usage is probably of no consequence here.
                                      >
                                      > Back to old Alt (need a smiley here): lo' & imperfect a categorical
                                      > demand, "thou shall not etc", 'al & jussiv less categorical: "Please,
                                      > do not ..." I know that I am back in the Jurasic Park of biblical
                                      > scholarship.
                                      >
                                      > Niels Peter Lemche
                                      >
                                      > -----
                                      >
                                    • Ariel L. Szczupak
                                      ... I was referring to the (tiny) knowledge of the Bible and of Biblical Hebrew. But the decalogue is a memorable piece of literature, partly because of its
                                      Message 18 of 21 , Nov 2, 2008
                                      View Source
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        At 02:10 PM 11/2/2008, victor wrote:

                                        >I must take issue with Ariel’s comment here about the Israeli
                                        >school system and the average Israeli’s knowledge of Hebrew.

                                        I was referring to the (tiny) knowledge of the Bible and of Biblical
                                        Hebrew. But the decalogue is a memorable piece of literature, partly
                                        because of its phrasing. Most Israelis would know, remember, that the
                                        bible says "lo tirtsah" (and not "al tirtsah") - that's my impression
                                        and personal experience. Maybe I'm wrong and they wouldn't know even that :(



                                        Ariel.

                                        [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

                                        ---
                                        Ariel L. Szczupak
                                        AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
                                        POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91406
                                        Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
                                        ane.als@...
                                        ---
                                        http://yvetteszczupakthomas.blogspot.com/
                                        http://undiamantbrut.blogspot.com/
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.