Jump to content

Talk:Hebrew language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Hebrew languages)
Former good articleHebrew language was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 19, 2004Refreshing brilliant proseNot kept
July 23, 2006Good article nomineeListed
October 14, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 March 2024

[edit]

In the chapter “Modern Hebrew”, replace

the elimination of pharyngeal articulation in the letters chet (ח‎) and ayin ( ע‎) by most Hebrew speakers.

with

the replacement of the pharyngeal articulation of the letters chet (ח‎) [ħ] and ayin ( ע‎) [ʕ] with uvular [χ] and glottal [ʔ], respectively, by most Hebrew speakers

The current version is not clear, because you cannot eliminate a pronunciation without either eliminating the sound altogether (which is not what happened here) or replacing the pronunciation with some other pronunciation. Daniel Bunčić (de wiki · talk · en contrib.) 14:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done * Pppery * it has begun... 23:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Land of Israel vs Southern Levant

[edit]

Land of Israel page states its synonymous with Southern Levant.

Recent revert is pure POV pushing and equally non-sensical (we're talking about the region of origin yet the response to revert to "Southern Levant" is "not all Jews speak hebrew"?)

Deleting editor is claiming Land of Israel is "non-factual" with no citation to back it. Hebrew is an explicit outgrowth of Southern Canaanite by Israelites specifically...splitting between the synonyms "Land of Israel" and "Southern Levant", I would stick with the term more closely associated with the language.

Want changes? Citations please, delivered on ice. Mistamystery (talk) 18:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mistamystery "Land of Israel" is not a demarcated place, southern Levant best describes the region where this language originated, also modern Hebrew came later and wasn't invented in the same place. "Land of Israel" is thus too dubious of a term to be used is such manner. Hebrew is also spoken worldwide.
Regarding the ethnic groups that speak it, Israelites do not exist today in any discernable way, and not all Jews speak Hebrew. Please understand this is not "POV pushing" but WP SKYISBLUE coming from a secular paradigm where preconceived notions are challenged in the light of evidence.
Shall we bring citations into this? Because until there is citations, it can be challenged JJNito197 (talk) 18:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jews and Samaritans refer to themselves as "B'nai Israel" or "Children of Israel" (which so far as the the wiki Israelites page is concerned considers to be synonymous with "Israelites"...which is frankly problematic and a separate matter to be addressed on that page). On those terms, Jews and Samaritans claim they are the descendants of the Ancient Israelites I presume you refer to.
Land of Israel is just as reasonably demarcated as Southern Levant, hence why they're synonymous. And modern Hebrew *was* developed (not invented) in this general location as well.
There's a fundamental issue within wiki on the general usage of this term that's reflective of a western academic bias that is irrespective of popular usage (as well as severe POV push by many users...not accusing you, its just a thing).
That said, not going to litigate it on this page. Appreciate the timely response. Mistamystery (talk) 18:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But they are not synonymous if 1) there are multiple different understandings/contrasting opinions on what exactly constitutes the Land of Israel, thus not demarcated by any sort of congruent universal metric... 2) Some definitions include a vastly larger area than just the Southern Levant. So who are we to decide on what definition to use? Wikivoice secular neutrality is thus paramount, in the fact that it cannot decide what does indeed constitute the Land of Israel by agreeing to any of the definitions through exegesis of the primary source (the Bible), or by proxy through commentary by religious scholars, for which there are many. For this reason, a regional descriptor is more apt.
Please remember that Wikipedia is not predicated on the 'truth'. How one perceives themselves is different to how one is actually perceived, which is why wikivoice has to be completly unattached from any preconceived notions in order to properly explain subject matter to the uninitiated reader, who is, for all intents and purposes, unfamiliar. Thanks for being amicable. JJNito197 (talk) 00:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I agree here’s why,Southern Levant is also Sinai and Jordan and The land of Israel is All of Israel and some other territories Noam Elyada (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed edit request: Arabic as one of the official languages of Israel

[edit]


In the lead section replace,

Modern Hebrew and Arabic are the official languages of the State of Israel,

with

Modern Hebrew is the official language of the State of Israel,

This information is outdated, as the Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish people has made Hebrew the sole official language of the State of Israel.

[1]

Gamercat365 (talk) 14:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No because this article isn’t about Israel it’s about Hebrew Noam Elyada (talk) 19:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Harel, A. (2021) ‘Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People’, Nationalities Papers, 49(2), pp. 262–269. doi:10.1017/nps.2019.127.
 Done Garsh (talk) 17:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]


In the lead section replace,

intra-Jewish commerce

with

intra-Jewish commerce

The current phrase links to a completely unrelated subject, and Wikipedia articles about related topics only mention the subject in passing, so removing the link is the most appropriate solution.


Gamercat365 (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

 Donemacaddct1984 (talk | contribs) 14:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Paleo-Hebrew script

[edit]

In the article they mention the Hebrew alphabet and Samaritan script but they don’t have the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet also so can I add it? Noam Elyada (talk) 19:43, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found 10 mentions of it, most of them linked, so you can't have looked very hard. In fact, I removed the one in the "see also" list because that list is supposed to be for related material that isn't already in the text. Largoplazo (talk) 23:33, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mean like the writing of Hebrew in paleo (𐤏𐤁𐤓𐤉𐤕) Noam Elyada (talk) 04:55, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the article that you claim doesn't mention it mentions it, now, 9 times. Largoplazo (talk) 05:05, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
im not talking about mentions of the paleo hebrew im talking about {{Script/Paleo-Hebrew}} Noam Elyada (talk) 13:39, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In your first sentence you were talking about mentions. Now you say you're not talking about mentions, that instead you're talking about a template that doesn't exist, You want to put a nonexistent template in the article?
The article already has five links to the article Paleo-Hebrew alphabet. It has nine mentions. Largoplazo (talk) 14:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I figured out what you're thinking about even though it isn't what you asked for. Did you mean to ask, "In the opening sentence, where the Hebew translation of the word 'Hebrew' is given in both modern Hebrew and Samaritan scripts, can we also give it in Paleo-Hebew script?" Largoplazo (talk) 15:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the end is that where the translate of the world “Hebrew” is in paleo Hebrew Noam Elyada (talk) 18:15, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since Paleo-Hebrew script hasn't been in used for 2,500 years, I don't think it's of any value. After all, the articles about English and German don't give the names of those languages in runes. Also, wouldn't it be anachronistic to write "ivrit" in that script unless that's what the language was called when the script was in use? Largoplazo (talk) 00:44, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]