> For an example of how much can be
> communicated with few words, just
> look at the Hebrew Old Testament.
> There are some thoroughly complex
> ideas expressed in a vocabulary of
> less than ten thousand words.
Glenn Morton replied:
> I agree that many complex ideas
> are communicated by only 10000
> words. But these 10000 words have
> prefixes, suffixes, tense markers
> etc. don't they? That vastly
> increases the number of words
> actually available.
The ten thousand words includes all variations used in biblical Hebrew.
Consider the Hebrew word in Genesis 1:1 that is transliterated
"baraysheet" and means "in the beginning". This word is actually the
word "raysheet" (beginning) with two prefixes--"be" (meaning "in") and
"ha" (meaning "the"). These two prefixes are combined into "ba" to mean
"in the". In the list of <10000 words, the three variations (and
others) which are apparent here are already accounted for separately.
In other words, the number of words I mention is an accurate reflection
of all variations employed in the text.
This of course does not exhaust the supply of words in the language--no
book contains all words that are inherently possible within a
language--but it does demonstrate that complex ideas can be communicated
by languages that are relatively primitive by modern standards.
Moreover, the significant influence of cultural perspectives and context
cannot be underestimated. As cultures became more complex, so did
languages. Gender integrated cultures have more complex linguistic
requirements than purely patriarchal ones. Industrial societies
required more words than agrarian--technological ones have needed still
more. Societies with advanced arts and sciences also required a rich
repertoire of words. Each domain of human activity and study has made
its contribution of words, phrases, and expressions to modern languages.
The ancient Hebrew society was not so broad. It was an agrarian based,
patriarchal society with limited arts and almost no sciences. The two
domains that contributed most to their language and culture was their
manner of life and their manner of worship. Consequently, the language
did not require an extensive vocabulary.
When Hebrew was resurrected for the modern nation of Israel, it had to
be substantially expanded and modernized. Having been dead (as a spoken
language) for over eighteen centuries, Hebrew had to be *converted* from
ancient to modern form where other languages had simply *evolved* with
the human cultures that used them. This makes Hebrew unique among all
modern languages--it has no evolutionary path that would have caused it
to change beyond recognition.
This does not mean that there are not major differences between ancient
and modern Hebrew--ancient Hebrew is now considered to be "high" Hebrew
and many native Hebrew speakers have trouble with it. There is an
Israeli woman that attends our Messianic Jewish synagogue who was born
and grew up in Haifa, Israel--her family is one of only four families in
Israel that can trace their lineage in Palestine for at least eight
generations. This woman reads scripture from a traditional Hebrew
language Bible, and she can only understand a few words here and
there--don't ask me why she doesn't go ahead a use an English bible.
The language in her Bible is *high* or *formal* Hebrew that is difficult
for her to understand, but it is not utterly unrecognizable to her. If
I was to attempt to read a Bible that had been written in the Old
English of the original King James Version, it would be virtually
impossible for me to comprehend even though the language used is only a
few centuries old. Ancient Hebrew is not nearly as distant in
linguistic evolution as even Old English is.
May the L-rd richly bless and keep you.
Russ
Russell T. Cannon
rcannon@usa.net