Talk:Paleo-Hebrew alphabet

Confusing introductory statement

"At the very least it dates to the 10th century BCE". I don't know if there's any guides of style regarding phrasing with respect to chronology. This seems confusing since I don't think of greater or less than as applying to time. You could argue that it's applying to the number of the century, which would be earlier for BCE but later for CE; or that an earlier language is of "greater" antiquity. Simpler phrasing: "It dates to the 10th century BCE or earlier". Just common sense. -- Petakia 12:24, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Possible dating error in the article.

I think the article means BC instead of BCE in these dates.

"BC" and "BCE" are the same thing. Scholars are now using "BCE" instead of "BC".

See Before Christ and Before Common Era. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

No image???

Why not add a picture of the alpahbet??? TRIKER1 21:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this article needs an image! --Bkkbrad 02:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The Ancient Alphabet Hebrew according to ancient Hebrew sources

• Remember the Hebrew ancient literature, is commonly look down at, if written the Greeks, Egyptians, or Romans more people would listen.--72.38.211.144 (talk) 00:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

In line with the Tanakh:--72.38.211.144 (talk) 00:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Circa 1473 B.C.E. is the date the Book of Job was completed, it covers a span time from, 1657 to before 1613, the Book of Job, was recorded by Moses* thus the ancient Hebrew* who read this in ancient Hebrew script.--72.38.211.144 (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

• According to the oldest tradition, among both Jewish and early Christian scholars. The vigorous authentic style of Hebrew poetry used in the book of Job makes it evident that it was an original composition in Hebrew, the language of Moses. "It could not have been a translation from another language such as Arabic". "Also, the portions in prose bear stronger resemblance to the Pentateuch than to any other writings in the Bible." And Job lived at the same time after Jospeh's death.--72.38.211.144 (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

• The date of recording of the Job must at have been between circa. 1553 B.C.E to 1513 B.C.E

The would mean that the ancient Semitic hebrew-script predated the common scholarally estimate of the start of the Canaanite script, which probably as their langauage, (a Northern dialect of diplomatic language of the entire Middle East at the time) was also adopted, it would seem that they were quite similar to the ancient Phoenician writing this the proper term is akin.--72.38.211.144 (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

• Exodus 17:14
• Exodus 24:4
• Exodus 34:1, 27-28.
• Exodus 39:30
• Numbers 5:23
• Deuteronomy 4:13
• Deuteronomy 5:22
• Deuteronomy 6:9
• Deuteronomy 10:2, 4
• Deuteronomy 31:9, 19, 22

• The 9th Psalm is an ancient acrostic, written by King David.--72.38.211.144 (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

• Flavius Josephus Antiquities of the Jews - Book I. Chapter 3. 6.

"There is a great mountain in Armenia, over Minyas, called Baris, upon which it is reported that many who fled at the time of the Deluge were saved; and that one who was carried in an ark came on shore upon the top of it; and that the remains of the timber were a great while preserved. This might be the man about whom Moses the legislator of the Jews wrote."

• 10th century B.C.E a 5-inch-by-5-inch shard of pottery near the Valley of Elah few words already deciphered -- "slave," "king," "land" and "judge" indicate that it may be a legal text.--Standforder (talk) 20:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/10/30/israel.ancient.text/index.html

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1032929.html http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-camera2-2008dec02,0,7568720.story --Standforder (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

• Estimated 10th century B.C.E limestone inscriptation from Tel Zayit,.--72.38.211.144 (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

• Estimated to be from the 10th century B.C.E Gezer calendar a tablet from tel Jezer.--Standforder (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Tel Zayit abecedary inscription vs. the standard abecedary

Tel Zayit

• ’aleph
• behth
• gi′mel
• da′leth
• waw
• he'
• chehth
• za′yin
• tehth
• yohdh
• la′medh
• kaph
• mem
• nun
• sa
• pe′
• ‛a′yin
• tsadheh
• qohph
• rehsh
• shin
• taw

Standard

• ’Al′eph
• behth
• gi′mel
• da′leth
• he’
• waw
• za’yin
• chehth
• tehth
• yohdh
• kaph
• lamedh
• mem
• nun
• sa′mekh
• ‛a′yin
• pe’
• tsadheh
• qohph
• rehsh
• shin
• taw

The Samaritan alpabet

- ’Ā´lāph. ' /ʔ/

- Bîhth. /b/

- Gā´mān. /ɡ/

- Dā´lath. /d/

- Iē’. /ey/,

- Báā. /b/

- Zēn. /z/

- Īhth.

- Tihth. /tˁ/

- Yūhth. /y/

- Káph. /k/ - [x] allophonically

- Lā´bāth. /l/

- Mīīm. /m/

- Nūn. /n/

- Sîn´gath/Sîn´kath. /s/

- ‛A´yîn. /ʕ/

- Phī’. /f/

- Tsa•dhey´. /tzsˁ/ /tş/

- Qūhph. /qˁ/

- Rīhšh. /ɾ/ (Judean Rehsh "head")

- šhān. /š/ (sh)(Judean Shin)

- Táph./t/ (Judean Taw "mark") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.211.144 (talk) 17:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Naming this oldest adjad

The term Proto-Sinaitic-leventian is a better term.--24.57.59.196 (talk) 16:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Orthodox Jewish View

I replaced the "Orthodox Jewish View" section with "According to the Babylonian Talmud", in which I specify the opinions and sources in Talmud Bavli. I Provided references for everything and I believe it is accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yclorfene (talk • contribs) 19:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The oldest known inscription?

The lines on pottery found near Beit Shemesh is not mentioned. See: [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.46.195.154 (talk) 23:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

What's the logic

"The 8th-century Hebrew inscriptions exhibit many specific and exclusive traits, leading modern scholars to conclude that already in the 10th century BCE the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet was used by wide scribal circles." Why do "modern scholars" conclude wide use from inscriptions 200 years later? And do we have a cite or a specific scholar? Car ads in 2010 lead modern scholars to believe George Washington had a car according to X in the publication Z. -- 21:43, 30 June 2010‎ User:Nitpyck

Funny comparison to the car ads! But language tends to take a while to take hold among a population. It first has to be learned (even if forced upon people who would rather speak or write their own language, or use their own alphabet). And then it takes time to become more widespread, across probably more than one generation: probably learned less fluently by the current generation that starts learning it, then learned more fluently by their children, and even more so by the children's children, and so on. So, about 200 years might be about right as a nearby guess for widespread use, or about 2-3 (plus) generations, if 70-80 years is presumed: for this, compare Psalm 90:10. Of course, it could have been far more than 200 years. Why they thought it was about 200 years, however, I don't know. I just thought I'd add something to the question asked. :-) Misty MH (talk) 00:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Interesting that "-- 21:43, 30 June 2010‎ User:Nitpyck" was just added above, by AnonMoos (at "19:59, January 16, 2013"‎). Curious. Did you find that under "View history"? How did you locate it? (I may have never tried to locate such, or at least not successfully, LOL. :) It is also strange that it shows my post above to be on the 17th, when the "View history" says it was on the 16th at 16:33. (And I myself know that it was on the 16th not the 17th.) Curiouser and curiouser! (as they say). Misty MH (talk) 13:27, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I looked over the display at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Paleo-Hebrew_alphabet&action=history and saw the line "21:43, 30 June 2010‎ Nitpyck (talk | contribs)‎ . . (7,843 bytes) (+476)‎ . . (→‎What's the logic: new section)". And comments are signed with UTC (Greenwich time), not your local timezone... AnonMoos (talk) 16:21, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Phoenician Alphabet = Paleo-Hebrew alphabet

Is there a real reason to differentiate between the two and have two separate articles? Does anyone really know where to draw the line between the "two"? Wasn't the "Phoenician" alphabet simply used all over Canaan with extremely minor differences across the land? In fact that applies also to the Canaanian language which really is the same language with minor dialectical differences from region to region, but I guess that's already a whole discussion here (You can't really pinpoint where does Phoenicia start or end, it is simply how the Greeks called the Canaanians they had encountered, and Hebrew isn't for certain something different from Canaanian). Ly362 (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

The letter forms were somewhat similar (especially in the earlier period), but they were used in distinct geographical areas, and by distinct political/ethnic groups, and used to write somewhat different (though related) languages. There were also different orthographic conventions which slowly diverged between Hebrew and Phoenician (such as the growing use of matres in some contexts in Hebrew, while Phoenician used almost no matres until the late "neo-Punic" period in north Africa). Finally, the modern interest in ancient Hebrew inscriptions is often different from the modern interest in ancient Phoenician inscriptions. AnonMoos (talk) 05:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you clearly draw the line between Phoenician and Hebrew, between Phoenicia and the rest of Canaan? Why not differentiate between the script used in Tyre and the one used it Sydon? Ly362 (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The upshot is that though Hebrew and Phoenician scripts were certainly closely related (and shared a common origin), they grew more divergent with time, and various internal and external factors make it more useful to have two separate articles. AnonMoos (talk) 02:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but can you draw the line. Can you say in what city did the people use the Phoenician script and in what city did they use the P-Hebrew script? Which one did they use in Dor? Are there really two scripts here, or is it a continuum? Or are there several scripts. Is it really two. Ly362 (talk) 03:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

There are hardly any known pre-exilic inscriptions from the Northern Kingdom at all, as far as I'm aware, and in any case a "non-continuum" would not be necessary for there to be two separate articles. AnonMoos (talk) 10:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

But how do you define P-Hebrew alphabet? How do you know that the Samaritan script came from this "one" and not simply from the whole system? Ly362 (talk) 23:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The possibly the earliest known inscription in the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet

P. Kyle McCarter Jr., an authority on ancient Middle Eastern writing at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, was somewhat more cautious, describing the inscription as "a Phoenician type of alphabet that is being adapted." But he added, "I do believe it is proto-Hebrew, but I can't prove it for certain." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/world/africa/09iht-alpha.html?scp=6&sq=The%20Newly%20Discovered%20Phoenician%20In Nitpyck (talk) 06:31, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Yiddish in paleo-hebrew alphabet???

Never heard of such a usage. I think it is an error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.135.100.57 (talk) 20:32, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Allegation

Hello. The allegation in this edit is unsourced and does not conform to WP:NPOV and must be removed immediately. Please stop the edit-war. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 20:09, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

What is proved by the fact that the Torah was able to be written in Greek

In the article, the following is stated: "This argument, however, is also weak because it was permitted to write the Torah in Greek". This is in response to the opinion that one Torah must be copied from another Torah, and therefore, the Assyrian script was never lost, i.e. not introduced by Ezra. This rebuttal doesn't really work, since as explained in the source brought for that statement (footnote 8), the permissibility of writing in Greek was only after the Septagint was translated, well after the time of Ezra the Scribe. By that time, everyone agrees that the Assyrian script was used.

Also, just because one can write a Torah in Greek, doesn't mean that when one is writing it in Assyrian script one does not have to copy it directly from a previous scroll.