Roger Pearse

Imagine walking around a town with all the signs written in a foreign alphabet in a foreign language (e.g. Chinese), looking for somewhere to get a drink and a meal. I am probably quite mistaken, but I have some doubts that my immediate need would be for a guide to theories of language.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Julian

This refers specifically to the two fields of study known as diachronic linguistics, the study of how languages change and evolve throughout time, and synchronic linguistics, the study of a language at a specific point in time.

Just an FYI.

Julian

Malachi151

I'm saying that for understanding the meaning of ancient texts and religions you are aided more by an understanding of the history of the cultures that produced those texts than you are by the ability to read the texts in their own language.

I would offer Christian scholarship as a prime example. Many Christian "scholars" (here I talk about Pastors, etc.) can read Greek and Hebrew, but few of them read the works of the ancient Greeks, or study ancient Greek religion and philosophy.

If you don't know the culture that produced the texts, then you have to read everything without context, and even if you are reading in the original language, that's pretty much useless.

Lets take two hypothetical people:

Jim - Jim knows Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, but has never studied outside of seminary and in seminary they never taught about the cultures of Greece, Rome, or Hellenistic Jews. Jim doesn't know anything about a diaspora, and he's never read the works of Plato, has never heard of Epicurus, except his mention by Paul, never heard about Mithras, doesn't know anything about Greek mythology, etc. Jim reads the Bible in its original languages.

Bob - Bob can only read English, but Bob studied ancient history at the University and Bob has a good knowledge of Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, and Roman culture. Bob has read the works of Plato, Aristotle, Ovid, Sophocles, Euripides, Epicurus, Democritus, Cicero, etc., and he has studied Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Babylonian, and Jewish religion, etc. Bob reads the Bible in modern English translations.

Who do you think will be able to form a better understanding of the Bible, better evaluate its merits, and offer better analysis of its meaning, origin, reliability, etc.?

Obviously the best case scenario is a combination of both traits, which many people here have. My point is that I think Bob would do better at BC&H, than Jim.

Peter Kirby

I voted "critical" primarily because there are vast swaths of material that have never been translated into English: lesser known classics, post-Nicene patristics, and thousands upon thousands of inscriptions and scraps of papyrus. I voted "critical" secondarily because there is a body of literature that has only been ever translated into English once, and the ability to compare translations is important for the English-only dilettante, yet that ability is not there with these works. Thirdly, I voted "critical" because there are arguments about the meaning of a text that can only be properly understood with a grounding in the language; and, moreover, can only ever be discovered by knowing the language.

--
Peter Kirby

Clivedurdle

I would get post-modernist here.

What is this BCH study about? We are trying to work out a key factor in European and world history and how we got to the set of world views we now hold.

We cannot time travel, we cannot understand as pj put it what is "what is truth" about. We can put forward ideas. But we do not need all to be specialists. The reality is that no-one is a specialist in all the languages or the particular age of that language - compare English today with six hundred years ago...

We need everyone to contribute the bit they can. I would also argue that a general understanding is more important.

And what happened to inter linear bibles or whatever?

Julian

They only give you half the information, so to speak. There are a number of Greek grammatical constructions that are not possible in English, interlinears won't show you that, for example. They also will not point out syntactical relationships, especially if there is ambiguity. They also do not give you a very good feel for the authors style. Granted, they are helpful but they are quite incomplete. Besides, what if you want to study some patristic text closely? I know of no interlinear version of any ANF text.

Learning a language is not that tough, it is worth taking the time to do so, IMHO.

Julian