Difference between revisions of "Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon"

(→‎Other interesting linguistic forms)
(→‎)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
== ==
 
== ==
 
{{evidence label}}
 
{{evidence label}}
 +
{{FMEItemShort
 +
|link=Book_of_Mormon/Anthropology/Language/Hebraisms/Colophons
 +
|subject=Colophons in the Book of Mormon
 +
}}
 +
 +
 
{{:Source:Chadwick:Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem:Lehi's House at Jerusalem and the Land of His Inheritance:Going "up" to Jerusalem}}
 
{{:Source:Chadwick:Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem:Lehi's House at Jerusalem and the Land of His Inheritance:Going "up" to Jerusalem}}
 
{{:Source:Echoes:Ch2:18:Land of Jerusalem}}
 
{{:Source:Echoes:Ch2:18:Land of Jerusalem}}

Revision as of 17:21, 5 October 2014

  1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon

Question: What is a 'Hebraism'?

A Hebraism is a way of speaking or writing that uses the grammatical or rhetorical styles of Hebrew

A Hebraism is a way of speaking or writing that uses the grammatical or rhetorical styles of Hebrew. For example, if originally written in English, the Book of Mormon would speak about "brass plates" instead of "plates of brass." However, "plates of brass" matches how a Hebrew writer or speaker would express themselves.

Therefore, Book of Mormon scholars look for evidence of the Book of Mormon's ancient Hebrew origins by identifying phrases or expressions which are not typical for an English speaker of Joseph Smith's day which may reflect a 'direct translation' of the underlying Semitic-style language of the Book of Mormon.

The presence of hebraisms does not prove the Book of Mormon is an ancient record, but they suggest that the translation was (at times, at least) relatively 'tight,' and require the critic to explain where Joseph Smith would have picked up such expressions in rural New York of the 1820s.


Question: Do Hebraisms exist in the Book of Mormon?

A number of Hebraisms exist in the structure of the Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon does indeed have authentic Semitic constructions in it, but LDS need to tread cautiously in establishing them. Each must be evaluated on its own merits. Hebraisms that could have been known to Joseph Smith may still be authentic, and may still enhance our appreciation of the text, but they are weaker evidence for Book of Mormon antiquity since Joseph could have gotten them from his contemporary environment.

Many LDS sources argue that Hebraisms exist. Some have been overly enthusiastic or operated using problematic methodology. For example, Hebrew and other Semitic languages frequently give give a verb a cognate direct object for emphasis, eg. "he dreamed a dream" or "He hit him a hitting." Since the KJV translators were frequently literal in rendering the Hebrew, the Old Testament contains many English examples of this. Thus, the presence of the cognate accusative throughout the Book of Mormon, though a valid Semiticism, cannot be used as strong evidence for the Book of Mormon. (An appreciation of such devices can enhance our appreciation of the text, however.)

For a Semiticism to be strong evidence it must be

  1. present in the Book of Mormon, but
  2. not common to Joseph's language environment (i.e., the KJV, or English of his day.)

Several such constructions exist. For example, in Alma 27:22, the Nephites give the land Jershon to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's "for an inheritance." Jershon follows a common Hebrew practice of creating names by suffixing -on to the tri-consonantal root. In this case, we have the root y-r-sh, which means among other things, "to inherit." (Hebrew /y/ is usually represented in English with a j.) In other words, the Nephites give the land "Inheritance" to the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's for an inheritance. If making up names at random, one could eventually make some that fit Hebrew patterns. However, the extreme unlikelihood of an imaginary name making sense in a reconstructed Hebrew original argues against this being the case with Jershon.

Dan Peterson notes the use of Hebrew idioms and cognate accusative structures in the Book of Mormon:

A number of details from the Book of Mormon text appear to support a view of the book as a rather literal translation from an ancient document.33 In an ancient Hebrew idiom, for example, arrows are "thrown" (see, for example, Alma 49꞉22). Also, just as in ancient Hebrew and other Semitic languages, in a construction known as a "cognate accusative,"[1] the word denoting the object of a verb is sometimes derived from the same root as the verb itself. "Behold," says the prophet Lehi, "I have dreamed a dream."35 Similarly, the (to us) redundant that in such expressions as "because that they are redeemed from the fall" and "because that my heart is broken" is a Hebraism (see, respectively, 2 Nephi 2꞉26 and 2 Nephi 4꞉32). [2]

Evidence


Chadwick: "one always went 'up' to come to the Jerusalem region, and one always went 'down' when exiting the Jerusalem region"

Jeffrey R. Chadwick: [3]

These observations are demonstrated by a three-step examination of Nephi's text: Nephi and his brothers returned from the valley of Lemuel up to the land of Jerusalem (1 Nephi 3:9). They then went down to the land of inheritance to collect Lehi's gold and silver (1 Nephi 3:16, 22). Finally, Nephi and his brothers returned back up again to Jerusalem (1 Nephi 3:23). It is important to remember that in the idiom of Nephi one always went up to come to the Jerusalem region, and one always went down when exiting the Jerusalem region. This is also the Hebrew idiom employed in the Bible, where persons in both the Old and New Testaments typically are said to go down to leave Jerusalem (see, for example, 2 Samuel 5:17; Luke 10:30; and Acts 8:15) and go up to come to Jerusalem (see, for example, 2 Chronicles 2:16 and Matthew 20:18). Nephi adhered to this Hebrew idiom throughout his account—whenever his party is reported to have gone to Jerusalem, they went up (see 1 Nephi 3:9; 4:4; 5:6; 7:3–4), and whenever the reference is to leaving the Jerusalem region, they went down (see 1 Nephi 2:5; 3:4, 16, 22; 4:35; 5:1; 7:2, 5).


Peterson: "it is now plain that Bethlehem could be, and indeed anciently was, regarded as a town in the 'land of Jerusalem.'"

Daniel C. Peterson:

[The prophecy in Alma 7꞉10] has occasioned considerable amusement among uninformed critics of the book,...predicting that Jesus "shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem, which is the land of our forefathers." As everybody who knows anything at all about Christianity also knows, Jesus was born in the little town of Bethlehem. However, although identifying a "land of Jerusalem" as the birthplace of Jesus would have seemed an obvious mistake for at least a century after the publication of the Book of Mormon, it is now plain that Bethlehem could be, and indeed anciently was, regarded as a town in the "land of Jerusalem." A recently released text from the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example—a text claiming to have originated in the days of Jeremiah (and, therefore, in Lehi's time)—says that the Jews of that period were "taken captive from the land of Jerusalem."49 Texts discovered earlier in the twentieth century seem to include Bethlehem within that "land." Joseph Smith could not have learned this from the Bible, though, for no such language appears in it.[4]

See FAIR Evidence:
View more evidence of Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon


Other interesting linguistic forms

These forms are included for interest's sake, or because their role as Hebraisms has not yet been established. They are included here because they may make difficult passages more easily understood.

Anapodoton

Alma 36:9 reads in part "If thou wilt of thyself be destroyed, seek no more to destroy the church of God."

This is a rhetorical device called anapodoton. The technical term is Greek, meaning "without the main clause." (The prefix ana- means "without," and apodosis means "main clause.")

Anapodoton is a figure in which a main clause is suggested by the introduction of a subordinate clause, but the main clause never occurs. It is an intentional sentence fragment. Here the fragment, archaically put, means "even if you have no care for your own soul...."

As is obvious from the context, it does not mean (as a native English speaker might read it) "if you want to be destroyed, stop trying to destroy the church"!

For further information related to this topic


Chiasmus

Summary: A literary structure known as "chiasmus" exists in the Book of Mormon. Some claim that the presence of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is either coincidental, an artifact of the observer, or not impressive since examples of chiastic patterns have been found in the Doctrine and Covenants or other 19th century writing.

If-and conditionals

Summary: The first edition of the Book of Mormon contained several examples of a grammatical structure not known in English, but common in Hebrew: the so-called if/and conditional.

Names: authentic Old World names in the Book of Mormon

Sami Hanna on the Book of Mormon

Summary: I have read a talk written by Elder Russell M. Nelson in which he discusses a friend of his who translated the Book of Mormon back into Arabic. What are the facts behind this story and the talk?


To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, [[../CriticalSources|click here]]

Notes

  1. ↑ See Donald W. Parry, "Hebraisms and Other Ancient Peculiarities in the Book of Mormon," in Echoes and Evidences, 176–77.
  2. ↑ Daniel C. Peterson, "Mormonism as a Restoration," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 390–417. off-site wiki
  3. ↑ Jeffrey R. Chadwick, "Lehi's House at Jerusalem and the Land of His Inheritance," Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem (Neal A. Maxwell Institute, 2004)
  4. ↑ Daniel C. Peterson, "Not Joseph's, and Not Modern," in Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon, edited by Donald W. Parry, Daniel C. Peterson, and John W. Welch, (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2002), Chapter 2, references silently removed—consult original for citations.


Further reading and additional sources responding to these claims

Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Hebraisms_in_the_Book_of_Mormon&oldid=124682"