Talk:Wilhelm Gesenius

message: The original Britannica article says that Gesenius was born in 1786 "Nordhausen, Hanover".
Was this city related administratively to Hanover then? I see that now it is in Thuringia, but close to the border with Lower Saxony of which Hanover is the capital. Can anyone please clarify this?
Thanks in advance. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 06:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nordhausen itself was a free city until 1802, when it was occupied by Prussia. It became part of the Prussian province of Saxony, which lasted until WW2. There was a Hanoverian enclave just north of Nordhausen, but I think Britannica was simply mistaken. Markussep Talk 09:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nordhausen, Hanover 

message: This article has a link to Phoenician languages, but the title of the link is "Punic". There is an article called Punic language; is there a problem to link to that directly?
I am not being bold and linking, because i know that it is still a controversial issue in which i am not an expert.
Any help would be appreciated. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 08:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Punic, properly so called, is the Carthaginian dialect. The article on Phoenician language is fuller, and may be more helpful to any reader who wants to pursue this obsolete error. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punic 

message: Just wanted to share a thought: I thought of changing Britannica's original "in spite of many offers of high preferment elsewhere" to "in spite of many attractive offers from other Universities" to make the style more modern. I'm not a native English speaker, but i'm quite experienced and it's the first time that i see the word "preferment".
And then i decided to leave it as is. "Preferment" is a perfectly good word and if it doesn't appear much anymore, i don't want to be the one who kills it. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I've certainly seen it before.  --TimNelson (talk) 01:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preferment 

message: In open Bible discussions, I have seen reference to 2 different works: Gesenius' Lexicon and the Brown-Driver-Briggs (BDB) Lexicon. I have learned that they were both from Gesenius. After researching the matter, I refined the description of those two works, both derived from the Lexicon Manuele. The write-up that I am displacing appears identically on many other places on the Internet, lending it a kind of mob-weighted legitimacy. But my information appears in the prefaces of the two volumes before me, and are cited at the bottom of this Wiki page.Mbanak (talk) 18:12, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Gesenius Lexicons? 

message: I'm having trouble finding much information about the Thesaurus.  Was it ever translated?  -- TimNelson (talk) 01:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to take such a long time to respond to a question such as this, TimNelson: No, the Thesaurus Philologicus Criticus Linguae Hebraeae et Chaldaeae Veteris Testamenti never received an English translation. The largest work of Gesenius to receive an English translation was the Lexicon Manuale Hebraicum et Chaldaicum in Veteris Testamenti Libros, which was as close to the Thesaurus as one could get without having the Thesaurus. Stephen Walch (talk) 13:58, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks!  Slowest conversation ever (on my part as well :) ).  TimNelson (talk) 22:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thesaurus 

message: The articles on a number of authors in all fields discuss their reputation at present.  If you write a section on that for Gesenius, start with Munro's Samaritan Pentateuch and Textual Criticism from 1815, a response to Gesenius 1815 work on the Samaritan Pentateuch.  It's on Internet Archive.
108.18.136.147 (talk) 11:26, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  and now?