spin

In Hebrew the name is glyt. In the Tel es-Safi find there are two names I've seen transcribed, )lwt and wlt { "y' = yod, ")" = alef, "w" = waw}. As you can see, no initial "g". The only thing that is the same are the two consonants "lt" in the right order. Nothing more. If the scholars I read transcribed the names correctly then the Goliath claim is just crap. And that's before ever knowing if the original form of the name Goliath was a common name in the era.

ETA: ya gotta be quick round here.

Toto

So spin - how do they know that these strings of Hebrew letters are non-Semitic? How do they connect them with Goliath, or Goliath with Aylattes, if you know?

spin

From what I understand the two words alone are inscribed on the stone and they don't look like Hebrew words. It's normal to inscribe names in this sort of context. If they are names they don't seem Hebrew. The letters are called Proto-Canaanite. Scholars trying to understand the name Goliath look to Indo-European sources and the one that pops up most is Aylattes -- which I always thought was Alyattes -- and this is somewhat similar to the first form I gave )lwt, though the waw is unexplainable. Still we would need some reason to explain where the "g" in the Hebrew Goliath came from. We don't have such a reason.


spin

DrummerWench

*wanders, for some reason, into BC&H*
*stumbles on linguistically interesting thread*

Hi, all :wave:

I dunno anything about Semitic linguistics, but as I recall, in the collision between Celtic & Old English, there's some overlap between "g" and "w".

*googles*

Well, there's not a lot, but I found:

Granted, this is from a Tolkien-wiki, not a .edu, but there does seem to be precedent for linguistic change g<--->w.

FWIW,
DrummerGirl

rob117

:rolling:

Really, I don't doubt that the name Goliath can be related to these names, but this sensationalism is just ridiculous. They found that Goliath is a possible Hebrew transcription of a palusible Philistine name. Big step from there to slaying a giant with a sling.

spin

Ummm, did you know that initial /p/ in Indo-European became /f/ in English or medial /t/ became /th/ -- just think of "father" v. Latin "pater"? Did you know that initial /c/ in Indo-European became /h/ in English -- think of "cor" and "heart", "cornus" and "horn", "canus" and "hound", etc. How about initial /g/ in Old French became /w/ in Normal French and we get doublets in English, "warden" and "guardian", "warrior" and "guerilla", etc...

But these are specific languages and you need enough samples to be able to note the rules. You can imagine all sorts of hypothetical sound changes but they have nothing to do with starting with a couple of names found on a piece of stone in what may have been Gath and immediately sensationalising the names because they had two consonant similar to the only name we know related to Gath.

As I said, the connection is crap. The relationship between Goliath and Alyattes is pure conjecture. And the relationship between )lwt and Alyattes is also, "what could these letters possibly be?"

Y'all gotta get out of conjecture mode and analogy mode and deal with facts.