Talk:Hebrew language

Latest comment: 4 days ago by JJNito197 in topic Land of Israel vs Southern Levant
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

Page title edit

The title of this page is illogical. Either "Hebrew" is sufficiently ambiguous and the language is not the primary meaning, in which case "Hebrew" should redirect to Hebrew (disambiguation), or it is not, in which case this page should be titled "Hebrew". The redirect from "Hebrew" to the language article in itself already admits that the language is the primary meaning of "Hebrew". Opposing arguments in the last move discussion are fallacious: That it sounds like the singular of "Hebrews" is irrelevant, since names of articles about ethnic groups are always in the plural, and while it is typical for Wikipedia articles about languages to have a title "X language", there are many prominent exceptions, where the language is the primary topic. An argument analogical to the "Hebrews" argument can also be applied to "Latin", because the ethnic group from which the language originates is known as "Latins", yet the article about the Latin language is still found at Latin because the language is overwhelmingly the primary (though by far not the only widely used!) meaning of "Latin". --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Have you looked through previous move discussions both here and at Talk:Hebrew (disambiguation)? Largoplazo (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Misspelling of name in text edit

in the History of Hebrew section, Scott Stripling is the correct spelling of the archaeologist.

Thanks! Ireneisgreene (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Fixed! Largoplazo (talk) 22:30, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Arabic as one of the official languages of Israel edit

Arabic is no longer an official language of Israel, and so the part of the introduction that says so should be removed. Gamercat365 (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

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

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