Response to Paul Flesher, 'The Aramaic Dialect of the James Ossuary Inscription'
In: Aramaic StudiesSearch for other papers by Margaretha Folmer in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
On the basis of the distribution of two linguistic features found within this inscription, Paul Flesher has argued that it is more likely that the James Ossuary inscription comes from the Galilee or southern Judea in later centuries (most likely the fourth or fifth century). The response discusses the methodological shortcomings of Flesher?s treatment of the linguistic evidence. It is argued that the language of the inscription fits into Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the second century CE onwards, possibly earlier.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 219 | 45 | 1 |
| Full Text Views | 41 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 35 | 2 | 0 |
Response to Paul Flesher, 'The Aramaic Dialect of the James Ossuary Inscription'
In: Aramaic StudiesSearch for other papers by Margaretha Folmer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
On the basis of the distribution of two linguistic features found within this inscription, Paul Flesher has argued that it is more likely that the James Ossuary inscription comes from the Galilee or southern Judea in later centuries (most likely the fourth or fifth century). The response discusses the methodological shortcomings of Flesher?s treatment of the linguistic evidence. It is argued that the language of the inscription fits into Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the second century CE onwards, possibly earlier.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 219 | 45 | 1 |
| Full Text Views | 41 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 35 | 2 | 0 |
