Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
_Roger
_Emeritus
Posts: 1905
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:29 am

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _Roger »

Glenn:

Dale linked to the chart I am looking at a few posts back on page 105, Fri Jun 10, 2011 7:43 am

I don't know why smilies are turned off for me. I have them turned on in my personal settings. Maybe I'm supposed not to have a sense of humor???


Smilies are turned off for everyone. Dr. Shades, the owner of the board, has smilie issues. He thinks they are dumb.
"...a pious lie, you know, has a great deal more influence with an ignorant people than a profane one."

- Sidney Rigdon, as quoted in the Quincy Whig, June 8, 1839, vol 2 #6.
_GlennThigpen
_Emeritus
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 5:53 pm

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _GlennThigpen »

Roger wrote:Glenn:

Dale linked to the chart I am looking at a few posts back on page 105, Fri Jun 10, 2011 7:43 am



Roger, the chart appears to be off by one chapter. I notices that it starts with 1 Nephi 2 rather than 1 Nephi 1. The offset continues through the end of 2 Nephi. There is a 2 Nephi 33, then a 2 Nephi with no chapter number, then the start of Jacob. The data appears to line up with the probability matrix after that.

I had no problems with it. This might start a religious war of another type, but you must be using an operating system from the Dark Side, i.e. ms windoze rather than Linux or OSX (which is turning dark itself).

I don't know if Bruce's matrix is still available online. I downloaded a copy when he first gave us the link. If you wish, I will email you a copy. I have also enhanced the matrix a bit and correlated the linear chapters to the actual book and chapter number in the Book of Mormon if you would like a copy of that. I can send it in MS Excel .xls format or in the OpenOffice .ods format.

Glenn
In order to give character to their lies, they dress them up with a great deal of piety; for a pious lie, you know, has a good deal more influence with an ignorant people than a profane one. Hence their lies came signed by the pious wife of a pious deceased priest. Sidney Rigdon QW J8-39
_Uncle Dale
_Emeritus
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:02 am

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _Uncle Dale »

Roger wrote:So I was looking at Bruce's chart you posted, Dale. For some reason it made my computer run about 60x slower
...


It is a large image -- perhaps your browser does not like that.

I've excerpted just the 1st Nephi and 2nd Nephi parts, here:
http://sidneyrigdon.com/criddle/BS/2012Bruce1a.gif

Perhaps that image will be less of a problem for your web browser.

UD


ps -- I don't think my bar chart is off by one chapter. As I
recall, Bruce produced 239 columns of data, and I charted
them all (his count: 0 through 238).
-- the discovery never seems to stop --
_GlennThigpen
_Emeritus
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 5:53 pm

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _GlennThigpen »

MCB wrote:I would suggest that the basic problem with the Schaalje study is that the correction for KJE worked well when comparing Isaiah with Isaiah in good KJE, but did not work when correcting for exaggerated KJE with bad grammar.



MCB, would like to point you to an article by Brian Stubbs concerning the "bad grammar" of which you speak. The article explains why the Book of Mormon archaic English is worse grammatically than the Biblical English that is quoted as well.

Here is one excerpt.
Brian Stubbs in A Lengthier Treatment of Length wrote:

a certain man, being called Amlici, he being a very cunning man, yea, a wise man as to the wisdom of the world, he being after the order of the man that slew Gideon by the sword, who was executed according to the law—Now this Amlici had, by his cunning, drawn away much people after him.

The three being participial phrases add background information or accompanying circumstances and are thus a prime language environment for hal-clauses in Semitic, and the English translation suggests that that is what the original Near Eastern language probably contained: clauses beginning with Hebrew we-hû or some synonymous circumstantial structure. The string of hal-clauses evident in Alma 2:1—2 is perfectly acceptable in Hebrew, yet an editor or English teacher would not spare red ink on a similar structure found in written English. An interesting study may be to measure the frequency of -ing participles in the Book of Mormon versus their frequency in Joseph Smith's other writings.


The full paper can be found at http://maxwellinstitute.BYU.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=5&num=2&id=125

Glenn
In order to give character to their lies, they dress them up with a great deal of piety; for a pious lie, you know, has a good deal more influence with an ignorant people than a profane one. Hence their lies came signed by the pious wife of a pious deceased priest. Sidney Rigdon QW J8-39
_MCB
_Emeritus
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _MCB »

That particular passage doesn't bother me. A scholar such as Spalding or a prof. at Dartmouth could easily imitate such language. I am more focused on some of the passages in I and II Nephi and Jacob right now.

His suggestion of charting "-ing" participles theoughout the Book of Mormon might reveal something.
Or Leffingwell.
Huckelberry said:
I see the order and harmony to be the very image of God which smiles upon us each morning as we awake.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... cc_toc.htm
_GlennThigpen
_Emeritus
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 5:53 pm

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _GlennThigpen »

MCB wrote:That particular passage doesn't bother me. A scholar such as Spalding or a prof. at Dartmouth could easily imitate such language. I am more focused on some of the passages in I and II Nephi and Jacob right now.

His suggestion of charting "-ing" participles theoughout the Book of Mormon might reveal something.
Or Leffingwell.



A scholar such as Spalding? He was trained in the classics and Latin. There is no indication that he was trained in Biblical Hebrew or any type of Hebrew at all. I really hope that you do not consider Leffingwell a reliable witness.

Glenn
In order to give character to their lies, they dress them up with a great deal of piety; for a pious lie, you know, has a good deal more influence with an ignorant people than a profane one. Hence their lies came signed by the pious wife of a pious deceased priest. Sidney Rigdon QW J8-39
_MCB
_Emeritus
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _MCB »

Only one way to find out. Remember I am a generalist in terms of other sources. Chart it out, and see if this differs with different "books" or if the two groups of strongest results from Jockers differ in that respect.
Huckelberry said:
I see the order and harmony to be the very image of God which smiles upon us each morning as we awake.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... cc_toc.htm
_GlennThigpen
_Emeritus
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 5:53 pm

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _GlennThigpen »

MCB wrote:Only one way to find out. Remember I am a generalist in terms of other sources. Chart it out, and see if this differs with different "books" or if the two groups of strongest results from Jockers differ in that respect.



Without even looking at the Jockers results in that light, I would think that the portions of the Book of Mormon that had the fewest mistakes grammatically. in English. would be assigned to the person that used the best grammar in their own writings.

Glenn
In order to give character to their lies, they dress them up with a great deal of piety; for a pious lie, you know, has a good deal more influence with an ignorant people than a profane one. Hence their lies came signed by the pious wife of a pious deceased priest. Sidney Rigdon QW J8-39
_Uncle Dale
_Emeritus
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:02 am

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _Uncle Dale »

GlennThigpen wrote:...There is no indication that he was trained in Biblical Hebrew or any type of Hebrew at all.
...


I suggest you read through "Biblical Hebrew in Colonial America:
The Case of Dartmouth," in American Jewish History, 1989, 79:173-80
(reprinted in Shalom Goldman's 1993 book, Hebrew and the Bible in
America: The first two Centuries
).

You might also wish to browse through the Rev. Ethan Smith's
several other volumes, besides View of the Hebrews. Why
did Ethan Smith know (and use) biblical Hebrew? -- Because he
was taught it by Dr. John Smith in Dartmouth Hebrew classes.
Dartmouth was one of the very few early American colleges to
employ a professor of biblical Hebrew and promote its study.

Up until 1809, annual orations were given in that language at
Dartmouth. And the students were expected to understand what
was being said to them in those addresses --- or, at least the
Divinity students such as Solomon Spalding and his friend Ethan
Smith were expected to understand that dead language.

Students can still study biblical Hebrew at Dartmouth -- it is
home to a noted Middle Eastern Studies Center and attracts
numerous Jewish students.

It would not surprise me at all, if one day a letter or paper of
Spalding's were discovered, in which he demonstrated his
knowledge of the language --- and I'd guess his proficiency at
least matched my own A- grade in two years of classes in
that subject, at Methodist Theological School in Ohio.

Of course, had I really wished to learn ancient Hebrew, I would
have been directed to the next school north of that seminary --
which is Oberlin College, host to expert instruction in the language.

UD
-- the discovery never seems to stop --
_GlennThigpen
_Emeritus
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 5:53 pm

Re: Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

Post by _GlennThigpen »

Uncle Dale wrote:
GlennThigpen wrote:...There is no indication that he was trained in Biblical Hebrew or any type of Hebrew at all.
...


I suggest you read through "Biblical Hebrew in Colonial America:
The Case of Dartmouth," in American Jewish History, 1989, 79:173-80
(reprinted in Shalom Goldman's 1993 book, Hebrew and the Bible in
America: The first two Centuries
).

You might also wish to browse through the Rev. Ethan Smith's
several other volumes, besides View of the Hebrews. Why
did Ethan Smith know (and use) biblical Hebrew? -- Because he
was taught it by Dr. John Smith in Dartmouth Hebrew classes.
Dartmouth was one of the very few early American colleges to
employ a professor of biblical Hebrew and promote its study.
UD



Dale, that is all very well and good. However, that does not do anything to show that Solomon ever studied Biblical Hebrew. It is not indicated by the statements of any of the witnesses, especially those of his family, brothers John and Josiah, nor his wife Matilda.
John Spalding said that Solomon graduated with the degree of A.M. That stands for Arts Master, I think. John does not indicate a B.D. or A.D. degree. I have read your notes on this and you have not found any evidence that Solomon studied biblical Hebrew under Dr. John Smith.
Brother Josiah said that Solomon did not study for the divinity at any public school after he left college, but he did say that Solomon had a change of heart from law to gospel and went to college.
We do not have anything of Solomon's curriculum at Dartmouth. So it is possible that he did study Biblical Hebrew, but there is no indication of it from any evidence that we have been exposed to thus far. I am pretty sure that he studied Latin though. It was standard fare for just about any degree during that period of time and fits in with his Roman story very well.

Glenn
In order to give character to their lies, they dress them up with a great deal of piety; for a pious lie, you know, has a good deal more influence with an ignorant people than a profane one. Hence their lies came signed by the pious wife of a pious deceased priest. Sidney Rigdon QW J8-39
Post Reply