From: Chris Jacobs (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat May 29 2004 - 18:06:05 CDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <email@example.com>
To: "Peter Kirk" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: "Peter Constable" <email@example.com>; "Unicode List"
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: PH technical issues (was RE: Why Fraktur is irrelevant
> Peter Kirk wrote:
> > On 27/05/2004 20:10, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> >> ... See http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/t08/t0805.htm for some
> >> Talmudic discussion of the matter.
> > It is interesting to see there that Daniel 5:8 (compare v.25 - the
> > event can be dated to October 539 BC) is cited as an example of the
> > mutual illegibility of palaeo-Hebrew and square Hebrew characters. It
> > is suggested there that the original writing on the wall, at
> > Belshazzar's feast, was in square characters which only Daniel could
> > read. In fact the scenario was more likely the other way round: the
> > inscription was in palaeo-Hebrew. Daniel, born in the land of Israel,
> > could probably read these glyphs, but maybe the Babylonian wise men
> > could not. The language of the inscription is not Hebrew but Aramaic,
> > but maybe the letters were palaeo-Hebrew. But then the author of the
> > book of Daniel ascribes Daniel's ability to read the writing not to
> > the different script but to wisdom given by God.
> Interesting, no?
> I just realized that on "p.59" the translation leaves out a verse from
> Exodus 27:10, claiming it its translation makes no sense. Yes, it
> does. The verse says "...the hooks of the pillars..." on which R.
> Eliezer quoting R. Elazar says "just as the pillars didn't change, the
> hooks didn't change." And this makes sense IF you recall that the word
> for "hooks of.." is "vavei", the same word as "vavs of..." i.e. the
> letters "vav" didn't change...
[Dan. v. 8] "They were not able to read the writing, nor to make its
The waw which is here translated as "nor". Has it, in this verse, allways
meant "nor" ?
Compare Daniel 5:7
Who can ((read this) ∧(explain it to me)) gets purple and gold and other
rewards, or something like that.
I would expect in Daniel 5:8 the logical negation of this, something like:
They ¬ (were able to ((read the writing) ∧ (make its interpretation)))
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 29 2004 - 18:18:46 CDT