Every man (or, woman) that is Bible believer has no problem to consider Bible a truthful source story about the Tower of Babel, and the by-God-triggered linguistic Division of Mankind.
Granted, there are many Bible passages that must be viewed in a symbolic way, but in this case there’s no indication — from context, or other factors - we have to view this passage in that way.
On the contrary, the geographical, and anthropological indication showed here (the journey east-ward, the plain of Shinar, the use of bitumen served as mortar between bricks of baked clay) indicates that this account is a historical account.
If we take so this story we receive a big tip about the origin of languages (except the so-called Sumerian and the languages derived from it).
According the Bible (here we are in a Bible Study thread), the original language was the first form of what we call today, ‘Hebrew Language’.
But, what the Bible really say about this argument? The historical account is reported in Genesis 11:1-9. Everyone may read it in the his own Bible. I now focus only on two verses.
Genesis 11:7, 9
(Good News Bible) Let us go down and mix up their language so that they will not understand each other. [] The city was called Babylon, because there the LORD mixed up the language of all the people, and from there he scattered them all over the earth.
(God’s Word) Let us go down there and mix up their language so that they won't understand each other." [only 11:7]
(Spanish Sagradas Escrituras) Ahora pues, descendamos, y mezclemos all sus lenguas, que ninguno entienda la lengua de su compaero. [] Por esto fue llamado el nombre de ella Babel, porque all mezcl el SEOR el lenguaje de toda la tierra, y de all los esparci sobre la faz de toda la tierra.
(Young, 1898) Give help, let us go down, and mingle there their pronunciation, so that a man doth not under-stand the pronunciation of his companion. [] therefore hath one called its name Babel, for there hath Jehovah mingled the pronunciation of all the earth, and from thence hath Jehovah scattered them over the face of all the earth.
Note the Bible doesn’t speak about the [1] confusion of [2] tongues, like many say, but about mixing up of the tongue (שפת בלל; שפתם שם ונבלה).
The translations above mentioned are based on a particular Hebraic verb which includes the original concept of to mix, to mingle.
If we make a collation of the entire corpus of the occurrences of that verb in the Hebrew Bible we discover that the translation confusion is only a conceptually derived one.
The original meaning — instead - revolves around the concept of to mix, to mingle.
So much so that from this verb did come out the derived noun בּליל. Strong applies to it this mean-ing: From H1101 [בּלל]; mixed, that is, (specifically) feed (for cattle): - corn, fodder, provender.
We cannot apply — logically - a confusion concept to the fodder/provender, whereas a concept of mixing/mingling is perfectly suitable to describe the vegetal blend the stockbreeders use for their animals. And, since the verb along the derived noun are to retain the same basic concept we may conclude the original meaning is to mix, to mingle.
We have to mention also the homologous Greek verb the LXX used in this verses.
In fact, the Strong states: From G4862 [σύν] and χέω cheō (to pour) or its alternate; to commingle promiscuously []. It was used also to describe melting metals actions.
In every case we may note in this Greek verb the same original concept, like the Hebrew verb used in TM.
What about Vulgata?
It’s all the same meaning.
The verb used there is confundo, perfectly homologous the Greek one of the LXX. Even to the basic construction preposition + verb (σύν + χέω, in Greek; con + fundo, in Latin). The original concept of confundo was to melt with, blend something through fusion.
So, instead to consider this Bible account a metaphorical or legendary story, we may conclude is a plausible historical account that inform us about the origin of the tongues. God created various languages (family of languages?) operating by some mixing some linguistic components of the original tongue (sin-tax/radicals/vocals between radicals?).
™ Version 4.2
