Theos-Talk Archives (August 1997 Message tl00668)

Me:
> >With the bible I have, the OT is Biblical Hebrew, Old Hebrew as some call
> >it.  The NT is Aramaic.
Alan:
> What scripts?  Is the Aramaic in square hebrew, or different characters?
> There are three main variations from different periods.  I have a NT
> diglot of the Peshitta text in facing pages of hebrew and aramaic from
> the Bible Society in Jerusalem.  Some of it is eye-opening.
Me:
*laugh* you got me, Alan.  I have no idea what you are referring to,
except that I have seen some odd curvacious letters which were referred to
as "modern script"  I wasn't aware of three, however.  I guess one would
say it is square hebrew, as is the aramaic.  The only difference I gather
between the aramaic and hebrew text in my bible, aside from the differing
words and meanings, is the diminished variety of accent and syllable
markers.  The consonants are written exactly alike, in block fashion.

The grammar I have introduces biblical script in modern usage.  Sort of a
mix of old and new, I suppose.  You would probably know much more about it
than I, particularly at this very early point in my learning.  In addition
to the grammar and the bible, I purchased the Hebrew and English Lexicon
to the OT, by Brown, Driver, and Briggs, an Oxford Publication.  I don't
know if will be of any use to me, for it is very possible that many of the
definitions were "biased", but I don't know enough about any of the
authors to make any definite assumptions, and since I don't have access to
a speaker of fluent biblical hebrew at this point, I guess I'll have to
take their word for it...:)

Gears grinding,

Jaqi.