ஆங்கில மொழியின் முதல் இலக்கண - அகராதி நூல் 18ம் நூற்றாண்டினது

The history of English grammars begins late in the sixteenth century with the Pamphlet for Grammar by William Bullokar. In the early works, the structure and rules of English grammar were based on those of Latin. A more modern approach, incorporating phonology, was introduced in the nineteenth century.

Christopher Cooper's Grammatica Linguæ Anglicanæ (1685) was the last English grammar written in Latin.
If by the end of the seventeenth century English grammar writing had made a modest start, totaling 16 new grammars since Bullokar's Pamphlet of 115 years before, by the end of the eighteenth, the pace was positively brisk; 270 new titles were added during that century.^[5] Both publishing and demand, moreover, would continue to mushroom. The first half of the nineteenth century would see the appearance of almost 900 new books on English grammar.

In America in 1765, the American Rev. Dr. Samuel Johnson, founder and first president of King's College in New York City (now Columbia University) published in New York An English Grammar; the First Easy Rudiments of Grammar Applied to the English Tongue. It "appears to have been the first English grammar prepared by an American and published in America. In 1767, Johnson combined it with a Hebrew grammar, and published it as An English and Hebrew grammar, being the first short rudiments of those two languages, suggesting the languages be taught together to children, which went to four more imprints by 1776.^[7]. Johnson developed his grammars independently of Lowth, but later corresponded and exchanged grammars with him.

Published on 4 April 1755^[1] and written by Samuel Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Language, sometimes published as Johnson's Dictionary, is among the most influential dictionaries in the history of the English language.

There was dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period, so in June 1746 a group of London booksellers contracted Johnson to write a dictionary for the sum of 1,500 guineas (£1,575), equivalent to about £220,000 in 2018.^[2] Johnson took seven years to complete the work, although he had claimed he could finish it in three. He did so single-handedly, with only clerical assistance to copy the illustrative quotations that he had marked in books. Johnson produced several revised editions during his life.

Until the completion of the Oxford English Dictionary 173 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent English dictionary. According to Walter Jackson Bate, the Dictionary "easily ranks as one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship, and probably the greatest ever performed by one individual who laboured under anything like the disadvantages in a comparable length of time".^[3]

பைபிள் தொன்மத்தின் யகோவா -கர்த்தர் வெற்று கதா பாத்திரமே

  Yahweh and it is a fraud on people.

” The Great Majority of readers take for Granted that Some Word Equivalent to “LORD” is in the Hebrew Text, but it is not. The Word-”Lord” is a title, not name;and and Putting it in Capital Letters does nothing to change this fact. But where the Bible Specifically has the personal name, translators should not take it upon themselves to make a substitution. The use of “Lord” instead of “Yahweh” effectively Depersonalizes the Deity, turns Him into a kind of Vague abstraction and rejects the repeated Emphasis in the Bible on his Unique personal relationship with Israel. It also disguises the fact tat YAHWEH is a Character in the Biblical Drama, with entrances and exis and a role to play, all assigned by the Writers.”

 -Page 313 -Bible As Literature, Oxford University Press, 

written by 3 Professors John.A.Gabel, Charles B.Wheelr and Antony.D.York.

இஸ்ரேலிய பைபிள் தொன்மக் கதைகளில் யாவே அல்லது யகோவா என்னும் கதாபாத்திரம், பைபிள் கதாசிரியர் உருவாக்கிய இஸ்ரேலிற்கான உள்ளூர் கடவுள் எனும் பாத்திரம், மூல எபிரேய மொழியில் அங்கு ஆங்கில லார்டு அல்லது - கர்த்தர் என்பதற்கு ஈடு சொல்லே இல்லை, யாவே என்பது ஒரு பெயர் சொல், பைபிள் கதாசிரியர்கள் உருவாக்க்ய கதையின்படி  உள்ளூர் கடவுள் எனும் பாத்திரம்.  

பைபிள் கதைகளின் முக்கிய ஆணிவேர், எபிரேயர்கள் இஸ்ரேல் எனும் கானான் பிரதேசத்திற்கு வந்தேறி அன்னியர், ஆனால்  தொன்மக கதைப்படி, இஸ்ரேலின் உள்ளூர் தேவன் யாவே அழைத்தார் எனும் கதை. மேலும் பஞ்சம் வர எகிப்து சென்றதாய் கதை, ஆனால் 400 வருடம் பின்பு கானானில் 10 நாட்டு இன மக்கள் செழிப்பாய் வாழ்ந்தவர்களை இனப் படுகொலை, இன அழிப்பு செய்து ஆக்கிரமித்தனர் எனக் கதை.

இஸ்ரேல் தொல்லியல் இயக்குனர் இஸ்ரேல் பின்கெல்ஸ்டின் எழுதிய நூலின்படி  இஸ்ரேல் தொல்லியல் இயக்குனர் நூல் "The Bible Unearthed:

பக்-2 The Historical Saga contained in the Bible - from Abraham's encounter with God and his Journey to Canaan, to Moses deliverance of the Children of Israel from Bondage , to the rise and fall of the Kingdoms of Judea and Israel - was not a Miraculous Revealtion but a brilliant product of Human Imagination.

ஆப்ரகாம் பாபிலோனிலிருந்து தேர்ந்தெடுத்து வந்தார் கதை, மோசே எகிப்திலிருந்து எபிரேயர்களை அழைத்து வந்தார் எனும் கதை, அதன் பின் பெரும் அரசாய் யூதேயா - இஸ்ரேல் இருந்தன என்பது இறைவெளிப்பாடு இல்லை. மனித வளத்தின் அற்புதமான கற்பனை.

பக் 117 And most of the Israelite did not come from outside Canaan - they emerged from with in it. There was no mass Exodus from Egypt. There was no violent conquest of Canaan. Most of the people who formed early Israel were local people- the same people whom we see in the highlands throughout the Bronze and Iron Ages. The early Israelite were - irony of ironies - themselves original Canaanites. 

Tel Aviv University archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog wrote in the Haaretz Israeli Leading Newspaper:

This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel.

 Perhaps even harder to swallow is that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. 

And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, YHWH, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai.