Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

The multilingual sign over Jesus’ Cross

 Language Learning Forum : Cultural Experiences in Foreign Languages Post Reply
28 messages over 4 pages: 1 24  Next >>
Arekkusu
Hexaglot
Senior Member
Canada
bit.ly/qc_10_lec
Joined 5381 days ago

3971 posts - 7747 votes 
Speaks: English, French*, GermanC1, Spanish, Japanese, Esperanto
Studies: Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Estonian

 
 Message 17 of 28
20 August 2010 at 8:21pm | IP Logged 
Did not my posts also conform to the rules?

Nevertheless, I will let you discuss your OP without interference.
1 person has voted this message useful



Doitsujin
Diglot
Senior Member
Germany
Joined 5320 days ago

1256 posts - 2363 votes 
Speaks: German*, English

 
 Message 18 of 28
20 August 2010 at 8:22pm | IP Logged 
JW wrote:
[...] My objective with this thread is only to discuss the linguistic aspects which I feel are very intriguing to those of us who are interested in ancient languages.

Actually, that was my impression, too. But you have to admit that simply listing the translations without any explanation might have given some people the wrong impression.
For instance, you could have compared the different translations in each of the gospels from a purely linguistic viewpoint etc.
1 person has voted this message useful



JW
Hexaglot
Senior Member
United States
youtube.com/user/egw
Joined 6122 days ago

1802 posts - 2011 votes 
22 sounds
Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Ancient Greek, French, Biblical Hebrew
Studies: Luxembourgish, Dutch, Greek, Italian

 
 Message 19 of 28
20 August 2010 at 9:54pm | IP Logged 
Doitsujin wrote:
JW wrote:
[...] My objective with this thread is only to discuss the linguistic aspects which I feel are very intriguing to those of us who are interested in ancient languages.

Actually, that was my impression, too. But you have to admit that simply listing the translations without any explanation might have given some people the wrong impression.

OK, I agree that I was remiss in this regard.

My reason for this thread is that I am planning to make a youtube video on this subject and I wanted to first expose it to a group of language experts to make sure I am not making any mistakes.

William Camden already made an excellent point that the third language could have been Aramaic and not Hebrew. The Biblical Text seems to only require "Hebrew Letters" (although I still need to research this further). Aramaic would thus qualify since it used the same square script as Hebrew. These are the types of comments I had hoped to elicit.   
1 person has voted this message useful



hanni
aka cordelia0507
Groupie
United Kingdom
Joined 5604 days ago

69 posts - 92 votes 
Speaks: Dutch*

 
 Message 20 of 28
21 August 2010 at 1:04pm | IP Logged 
In case anyone is not clear on this: Translation error or not (I have no idea!) In order to be a Christian, you have to believe in the virgin birth, or at least try to... If you are not able to do that, then you are not a Christian.

For the record, I have seen the INRI inscription in many protestant crucifixes, in church. I was never quite sure what it meant though. But I am sure this can't be purely a Catholic practice, or I wouldn't be aware of it.



1 person has voted this message useful



William Camden
Hexaglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6272 days ago

1936 posts - 2333 votes 
Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Russian, Turkish, French

 
 Message 21 of 28
21 August 2010 at 2:49pm | IP Logged 
Targums, glosses in Aramaic to assist comprehension of Hebrew, already existed at the time, which makes me think Aramaic was not so close to Hebrew as to make Hebrew readily comprehensible to Aramaic speakers.
1 person has voted this message useful





newyorkeric
Diglot
Moderator
Singapore
Joined 6379 days ago

1598 posts - 2174 votes 
Speaks: English*, Italian
Studies: Mandarin, Malay
Personal Language Map

 
 Message 22 of 28
21 August 2010 at 3:23pm | IP Logged 
Arekkusu wrote:
Did not my posts also conform to the rules?

Nevertheless, I will let you discuss your OP without interference.


No, yours and some others posts in this thread don't. Discussions focused on language issues surrounding the Bible are fine. Discussions or debates on religion outside of a language context aren't allowed because the debates become too heated.

Edited by newyorkeric on 21 August 2010 at 3:25pm

1 person has voted this message useful



JW
Hexaglot
Senior Member
United States
youtube.com/user/egw
Joined 6122 days ago

1802 posts - 2011 votes 
22 sounds
Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Ancient Greek, French, Biblical Hebrew
Studies: Luxembourgish, Dutch, Greek, Italian

 
 Message 23 of 28
21 August 2010 at 7:31pm | IP Logged 
William Camden wrote:
Targums, glosses in Aramaic to assist comprehension of Hebrew, already existed at the time, which makes me think Aramaic was not so close to Hebrew as to make Hebrew readily comprehensible to Aramaic speakers.


For comparison of Hebrew and Aramaic I found Matt 27:37 in the Peshitta in square script. Here is a comparison to the Hebrew:

Hebrew:   זה הוא ישוע מלך היהודים
Aramaic: הזו ישוע מלכא דיהודיא
English: THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS

You can see they are very close.

However, your point is well taken. The targums show that the general populace could not fully understand spoken Hebrew at the time. However, I think learned people could read it.
1 person has voted this message useful



JW
Hexaglot
Senior Member
United States
youtube.com/user/egw
Joined 6122 days ago

1802 posts - 2011 votes 
22 sounds
Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Ancient Greek, French, Biblical Hebrew
Studies: Luxembourgish, Dutch, Greek, Italian

 
 Message 24 of 28
21 August 2010 at 7:38pm | IP Logged 
hanni wrote:
For the record, I have seen the INRI inscription in many protestant crucifixes, in church. I was never quite sure what it meant though. But I am sure this can't be purely a Catholic practice, or I wouldn't be aware of it.


That is interesting. I would think that Protestant churches would eschew the "INRI." To me it has a very Catholic feel to it, as it is based on the Latin which is the Catholic ecclesiastical language. Latin has no place in Protestant Christianity.


1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 28 messages over 4 pages: << Prev 1 24  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.3281 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.