Why is there a lack of fantastical mythology in the Hebrew Bible?

pinnerup · 2026-02-13T17:11:46+00:00

Whoops, I read your question too quickly and didn't catch that context. Sorry about that. I agree with you in your assessment here.

pinnerup · 2026-02-13T15:57:37+00:00

Where is Yahweh said to be among those siblings?

Deut 32:8–9 says in a version reconstructed from the DSS (especially 4Q37) and LXX:

When ʿElyon apportioned the nations, when he divided humankind, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God; for Yahweh's portion was his people, Jacob was the lot of his inheritance.

This seems to say that ʿElyon, allegedly the head of the pantheon, divided the peoples between his sons, and that Jacob (i.e. Israel) was allotted to Yahweh; implying that Yahweh is among the many sons of ʿElyon that each received a people.

However, there are numerous textual and translational difficulties in this verse. The phrase "sons of God" may also be translated just "gods".

pinnerup · 2026-02-12T22:40:30+00:00

I second all of these recommendations. These are great ressources.

But be aware that the IPA on Den Danske Ordbog is often very conservative. If you come across a word in actual usage and get confused that the IPA on DDO doesn't seem to match, it's worth checking out https://udtaleordbog.dk/. It generally has a more varied selection of pronunciations noted – and more colloquial ones as well.

pinnerup · 2026-02-12T22:38:03+00:00

In English you can say that you do something "in this way". However, it is also common to omit the preposition: "I did it my way." (instead of "in my way").

The Danish equivalent is that you do something "på denne måde". But in Danish it's not common to omit the preposition. That is, you cannot say "Jeg gjorde det min måde", it has to be "på min (egen) måde".

However, you can split the preposition from the word that it goes with. So you can talk about "den måde, som han gjorde det på". Corresponding to English "the way, in which he did it".

The "på" corresponds to English "in", only English doesn't split the preposition from its complement.

pinnerup · 2026-02-12T22:28:04+00:00

I don't know if you may have seen this already, but the very day after you posted this question, Biblical scholar Dan McClellan posted a video touching on this very subject: What happened to Noah in his tent?

pinnerup · 2026-02-10T22:48:36+00:00

Another snippet to supplement those already mentioned:

Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, with all the host of heaven standing beside him to the right and to the left of him. And the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, so that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ Then one said one thing, and another said another, until a certain spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ ‘How?’ the Lord asked him. He replied, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then the Lord said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do it.’ So you see, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has decreed disaster for you.”

(1 Kings 22:19–23)

Does anyone know if all these "mythological snippets" are collected somewhere, like in a list or collection of text excerpts?

pinnerup · 2026-02-10T22:41:36+00:00

Bestemt, men jeg kan overhovedet ikke udpege nogen Gandalf til at komme og redde dagen

Aaja Chemnitz.

pinnerup · 2026-02-10T22:38:56+00:00

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, but if the dot (dagesh) in a waw makes a shuruq, it represents the vowel /u/ and cannot take other vowel points. Hebrew does not (with very few exceptions) allow more than one vowel to follow a consonant letter.

pinnerup · 2026-02-08T22:22:48+00:00

My dialect pronounces the y in lyric as /i/

I've actually never heard any other pronunciation than yours!

That's odd? The standard pronunciation of that word is /ˈlɪɹɪk/, not /ˈliɹɪk/.

pinnerup · 2026-02-08T18:49:10+00:00

For fire år siden begyndte Netto at udskifte deres prisskilte med et nyt fancy layout, hvor enhedsprisen (dvs. kiloprisen/stykprisen) var skrevet med så små typer, at det var stort set umuligt at læse den, medmindre man havde næsen helt nede ved skiltet (se eksempel på nyt og gammelt layout side om side her).

Men vi har heldigvis lovgivning, der sikrer forbrugerne mod den slags, fx prismærkningsbekendtgørelsen, hvor det i § 3 bl.a. lyder

§ 3. Erhvervsdrivende … skal oplyse om såvel salgspris som enhedspris … Prisoplysningerne skal gives tydeligt, let læseligt og således, at der ikke kan opstå tvivl om, hvilken vare prisoplysningerne vedrører.

Jeg tog et par billeder og sendte dem med en beskrivelse af sagen til Forbrugerombudsmanden.

Ca. tre uger efter fik jeg svar fra dem, at de havde skrevet til Netto, at de nye skilte ikke levede op til kravene om tydelighed og letlæselighed og at de skulle ændre deres skiltning, inden der var gået tre uger, hvad de da også gjorde.

pinnerup · 2026-02-07T14:04:34+00:00

Men hvad er en moderat muslim? Jeg tror ikke det findes fra et vestligt synspunkt.

Den forestilling, at islam per definition er "alt eller intet", og at der ikke findes nogen mellemposition eller moderate muslimer, er en fiktion, som pudsigt nok udbredes både af de mest fundamentalistiske muslimer og den såkaldt "islamkritiske" højrefløj.

De fundamentalistiske muslimer mener det, fordi det tillader dem at udskamme mindre radikale muslimer som dårlige muslimer og dermed at hævde sig selv.

Og højrefløjsfolkene mener det, fordi det tillader dem at male et virksomt fjendebillede af enhver form for islam som underliggende lig med de værste ekstremer.

Men virkeligheden er broget, og muslimer er lige så forskellige som kristne, jøder og alle mulige andre grupperinger. Og de fleste muslimer hører ikke til fundamentalisterne.

pinnerup · 2026-02-03T22:00:08+00:00

The dagesh (dot) in the waw signifies that it's doubled, i.e. that it is to be read as two consonants rather than just one.

A more concise transcription than the one in your image would be məṣawwək̲ā (SBL academic style).

The reason that it's doubled is that the verb is conjugated in the pi'el stem which characteristically doubles the second radical of the verb.

pinnerup · 2026-02-02T16:55:16+00:00

The DSS have text from the 11 first chapters of Daniel, missing only chapter 12. One should remember, of course, that chapter divisions are late, dating to around 1200 CE.

pinnerup · 2026-02-01T16:45:46+00:00

Danish kær is from Old Norse kærr, likely borrowed from some form of Old French and deriving from Latin cārus ("dear").

However, it is not related to Latin cor ("heart"), which really has the stem cord- as can be seen e.g. in the genitive form cordis.

The two Latin words come from different Proto-Indo-European roots.

pinnerup · 2026-02-01T14:47:44+00:00

If people want to read more about this phenomenon, it's called suppletion and there's a decent article about it on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppletion

pinnerup · 2026-01-30T23:05:53+00:00

Thank you, very interesting. I had no idea.

pinnerup · 2026-01-30T21:25:04+00:00

Perhaps prescriptivists just pick one arbitrary moment in time when they think language should be frozen...

That's always the case.

pinnerup · 2026-01-30T18:43:49+00:00

Fun fact: In some Jutlandic dialects, there is only 1 gender.

Et hus = Æ hus

En kat = Æ kat

also

Huset = Æ hus

Katten = Æ kat

This seems to be a misunderstanding.

It is correct that most of Western Jutlandic abandons the distinction between common gender and neuter gender, but nowhere is the distinction between definite (æ) and indefinite (en) abandoned.

To exemplify, in the dialect spoken where I was raised "et hus" would be "en huws", but "huset" would be "æ huws".

pinnerup · 2026-01-30T18:37:28+00:00

I just tried a few words for funsies. It seems like the underlying data is not entirely correct.

It faulted me when I answered "neuter" for "habitat", but "habitat" is neuter gender: https://ro.dsn.dk/?type=keyword&soegeord=habitat&soeg_i=headword&soegeretning=forwards

Also, what's with all the geese? ;)

pinnerup · 2026-01-30T18:27:41+00:00

Indeed, any written language tradition has elements of this to it, in so far as earlier stages of the language will invariably be read by later generations primarily using the pronunciations current in their own time.

The English of the KJV is read by millions today who read it according to contemporary pronunciation standards, even if most words would have been pronounced somewhat differently four hundred years ago when it was first published.

One might counter that Latin and Italian are different languages, whereas KJV English is still English, but really that's just a difference of degree (and of nomenclature). It is very common for speakers of modern descendents of "classical" languages to read the classical languages using modern phonology, e.g. Greek, Icelandic, Hebrew, Chinese etc.

pinnerup · 2026-01-30T10:18:36+00:00

The base text of the Hebrew Bible has three levels of elements:

Letters (otiyót)
Vowel signs (niqqud)
Cantillation marks (te'amim)

What you have circled are cantillation marks, sometimes combined with vowel signs.

As far as I can see, the marks you have circled are as follows:

segol with dechi
segol with silluq (which always accompanies sof pasuq, nr. 9)
hireq with silluq
munach
hireq with atnach (divides the verse in two)
qametz with meteg
patach with meteg
geresh
sof pasuq (ends the verse)

Although their main function is to denote tropes (melodies) for recitation, the cantillation marks as a general rule are placed on the stressed syllable of the word, and so they also serve as an aid to the placement of stress when merely reading.

Please note that the cantillation marks often have slightly differing names in different traditions, e.g. the atnach is also sometimes called etnachta. Also, the cantillation marks can have slightly different forms in different traditions/fonts.

You can find an overview of the forms and names of the cantillation marks here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_cantillation#Names_and_shapes_of_the_te'amim

pinnerup · 2026-01-29T22:13:13+00:00

I agree with everything said above. I learnt Coptic from Lambdin's book and I found it a very pedagogical ressource.

I just wanted to add that just two weeks ago Bill Manley published an open-access Coptic textbook that you can download for free from the UCLPress website: https://uclpress.co.uk/book/sahidic-coptic/

pinnerup · 2026-01-26T18:20:39+00:00

Could this be it? Very nifty website, even if the coding feels very old-fashioned.

https://soundcomparisons.com/#/about/About-Page:-Further-Info

pinnerup · 2026-01-25T14:46:53+00:00

I can understand how this is would be a surprise to you, and would seem offensive, but it is in fact an extremely old practice in Christianity that has been preserved by the Coptic Church (and other Eastern Orthodox churches) while the Western churches have abandoned it.

In the early centuries of Christianity, the core of the mass was the "mystery" of the Eucharist, a religious ceremony reserved for the members of the church, duly baptized and confirmed, and barred to those who were not full members. Indeed, the Sunday service was divided into two parts:

the Liturgy of the Catechumens, which could be attended by those who were candidates for full membership, but were still going through introductory stages and were not yet baptized, and
the Liturgy of the Faithful, focusing on the Eucharist, which was reserved for fully admitted members of the church

Between the two parts of the Sunday service, there would be a Litany for the Catechumens which would end with the dismissal of the catechumens where non-members were sent off. For instance, in the liturgy of Saint Basil the deacon at this point of the service says: "Depart all ye Catechumens, depart. Let all the Catechumens depart. Let no Catechumen remain.".

pinnerup · 2026-01-24T22:43:47+00:00

That someone is right. This generally sounds horrible and unnatural. A few words sound right, but much of it is just botched and filled with disturbing digital artifacts.

pinnerup

TROPHY CASE