judge

Yes..I agree here Haran. I have been relying on peshitta.org for this but can't quite find the evidence that really "nails it".
Some of the other split words seem more compelling in the links I gave.

Being zealous is quite different to burning (in the literal sense) but although it could mean Boasting" perhaps it would be good to see it used this way.

Haran

True. I find this subject very interesting. You and Yuri are convincing me to have a go at learning Syriac/Aramaic so that I can better assess these arguments. I'll have to look into some of the others when I next have the chance.

Haran

I think "zealous" was from another argument in the link that you presented ("zealous" and "imitate"...). I don't think it was one of the definitions of yqd.

judge

Hi again...finally found the original instance of this view of 1 Corinthians 13:3

Paul Younan lists zealous here as a meaning, though boast is still not explicit.

http://www.peshitta.org/forums/forumid6/1565.html

Additionally they have devoted a forum to the study of this kind of thing here.

http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=10

judge

Try www.peshitta.com as well.
It has two online translations and an online syriac version.
If you click on the individual word in the Syriac version it will give the meaning of the word.

This is the western version of the peshitta. Two verses were changed to make them more monohphysite.
Hebrews 2:9 and Acts Chapter 20 reads Church of God instead of Church of Christ.

Additionally there are slight dialectical varaitions between the two texts

Haran

Thanks judge.

I just don't buy the "burned"/"boast" correlation. It is pretty clear from the sources I've been reading that the major meaning of the word "yqd" is "burn" and not "boast". There is the secondary meaning of "ardent", but I still don't really see a connection with "boast". It is clear however that the two Greek words are very close and that the variant reading more than likely developed from a slip than from the possibility of underlying Aramaic.


Another topic.... I just finished reading Mark in the Greek and am now looking at the first chapter of Mark in Syriac, specifically the Peshitta. Talk about slow reading...

Anyway, I immediately ran into the following in the very first verse of Mark (I'm not going to put this in Unicode...too long...left-to-right transliteration from your peshitta.com website instead):

D'eAOaNG'eLi;oON

Chop off the particle d' and you have what sounds like Evangelion! This is not Syriac. This is a Greek word transliterated into Syriac. It is the Greek word for Gospel which is itself a combination of two Greek words: EU = Good, and ANGELION = Message.

I'm interested to see how many more Greek words are transliterated into Syriac in the Peshitta. I've also been reading Metzger's Early Versions and it has a big section devoted to Syriac and goes into minute grammatical detail on why the Syriac appears to be a translation of the Greek and not the other way around.

Thoughts to ponder...

judge

Yes it appears to be a loan word although from what I know the origin is uncertain. There have been a few discusions in this a t peshitta.org

The only other word of uncertain origin that I recall which seems to be greek is paracletos.

What did you think of the other split words?

Haran

How can I find these specific discussions? I'd like to read them. Is there a search feature? I may join the list in case I have other questions.

I have not had the chance to go into others in detail yet, but they appear at first glace to be more solid than the case of "yqd".

Seriously, though, I can understand one or more of the gospels having originally been in Aramaic. This is why I hope to more thoroughly read Matthew Black's An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts.

However, what are the reasons for believing that Paul would have written to Greeks in Aramaic?

judge

Yes if you go to the links section on the left you will find the archived forums.

Quote:

I have not had the chance to go into others in detail yet, but they appear at first glace to be more solid than the case of "yqd". Seriously, though, I can understand one or more of the gospels having originally been in Aramaic. This is why I hope to more thoroughly read Matthew Black's An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts. However, what are the reasons for believing that Paul would have written to Greeks in Aramaic?

1.We know from the book of acts that aramaic was Pauls first language. How good his greek was is unclear.
2.early believers would have had many jews amongst them I think.
3.Even the greek copies retain aramaic..."maranatha", for example.
4.Why would Paul write to Romans in greek?

5. Romans 5:7 contains what seems to be a mistranslation. There is a thread here somewhere on it.

6. There is poetry and wordplays in Pauls letters which work in Aramaic.

Haran

Ok... Acts 21:40 & 22:2

However, if they were speaking Aramaic previous to this, why is it specifically mentioned that Paul spoke to them in, literally, "Hebrew dialect" (most likely Aramaic)?

It seems to me that he was probably speaking in Greek up to that point.

True. But Paul claimed to be sent specifically to the gentiles. The churches would have had jews among them, but the early churches of Corinth, etc. would surely have been mostly Greek.

Good point. I'm not sure I find this particularly troublesome, however, as it could have been a loan phrase or formula for the church.

I believe I have read that Greek was the lingua franca (hope I got that right) of that time period. In other words, Greek was the "common tongue". I would imagine it would be kind of similar to English today. If two people from very different countries wanted to speak to each other today, each of them might be more likely to know English than each others' language, so they would use English to communicate. Greek would have been similarly used in that time period according to things I have read.

Ok. I'll try to look it up.

Hmm... Ok. These are things I can't really speak to at the moment, but I'll see if I can look into them.

It seems likely to me that some "wordplays" can be accidental rather than intentional, but I'd have to investigate.