|
According to most adherents of the Latter Day Saint movement, the Book of Mormon is a 19th-century translation of a record of ancient inhabitants of the American continent, which was written in a script which the book refers to as "reformed Egyptian."〔(Elder Dallin H. Oaks: "The Historicity of the Book of Mormon" )〕〔(Book of Mormon/Historicity - FAIRMormon )〕〔(Mormon Truth and Book of Mormon Evidences: Not Proof, But Indications of Plausibility ) 〕 This claim, as well as virtually all claims to historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon, are generally rejected by non-Latter Day Saint historians and scientists.〔〔Simon G. Southerton, ''Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church (2004, Signature Books).〕〔Jerald and Sandra Tanner, ''Mormonism-Shadow or Reality?'' (1972, Modern Microfilm Company).〕〔(Statement of Smithsonian Institution regarding Book of Mormon ).〕〔(A Linguist Looks at Mormonism ).〕 Linguistically based assertions are frequently cited and discussed in the context of the subject of the Book of Mormon, both in favor of and against the book's claimed origins. Both critics and promoters of the Book of Mormon have used linguistic methods to analyze the text. Promoters have published claims of stylistic forms that Joseph Smith and his contemporaries are unlikely to have known about, as well as similarities to Egyptian and Hebrew. Critics of the Book of Mormon claim there are places where the language is anachronistic and suggestive of a 19th-century origin consistent with Smith's upbringing and life experience, as well as the books and other literature published just preceding the time that the Book of Mormon was published.〔(The Book of Mormon: Ancient or Modern ).〕 The problem with linguistic reviews of the Book of Mormon is that the claimed original text is either unavailable for study or never existed. Smith said that he returned the golden plates to an angel after he finished the translation. ==Native American language-development== In 1922, LDS Church general authority B. H. Roberts conducted an in-depth review of the research regarding language development and dialects among the native American peoples; Roberts's study which was published posthumously in 1985 as ''Studies of the Book of Mormon''.〔Brigham D. Madsen, ed., B. H. Roberts: ''Studies of the Book of Mormon'', Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985.〕 Under the assumption that the majority of Native Americans descend from the peoples described in the Book of Mormon, Roberts noted that linguistic evidence among the Native American peoples does not appear to support the Book of Mormon narrative, inasmuch as the diverse language stocks and dialects that exist would not have had enough time to develop from a single language dating from 400 A.D. (the date of the conclusion of the Book of Mormon record). Roberts noted:
Apologists from FARMS have published studies that claim that the linguistic evidence cited by Roberts does not necessarily contradict the narrative of the Book of Mormon. Specifically, if one adheres to the limited geography model, then it is possible that many of the peoples of the Book of Mormon are not the principal ancestors of the Native Americans.〔. See citations in note 4 therein.〕 One Mormon linguist has published a survey of similarities between Semitic languages and Uto-Aztecan.〔Brian D. Stubbs. 1996. ("Looking Over vs. Overlooking: Native American Languages: Let's Void the Void )", ''Journal of Book of Mormon Studies'', volume 5, issue 1, pp. 1–49. (1996).〕 Specialists in the languages of Native America have accepted no proposals for a relationship between any Native American language or language family and the languages of the ancient Near East.〔Lyle Campbell. 1997. ''American Indian Languages: The Historical Linguistics of Native America.'' Oxford, p. 261. "Before turning to the more seriously entertained proposals, I provide a small selection ... of the many proposals which would link languages of the Americas with languages from elsewhere in the world. Although some of these proposals have been expounded in more detail than others, none reaches a level of plausibility that makes it worthy of additional attention. Each is near the 100% probability that the languages are unrelated ... the confidence ratings in these instances also approach 100%."〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Linguistics and the Book of Mormon」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|