[Philosopher and grammarian. He is called Maestre Profiat and Efodi, but his Hebrew name was Isaac b. Moses ha-Levi. He was born in the second half of the fourteenth century, and lived for some time in Perpignan. During the persecutions in 1391 he was an ostensible convert to Christianity. He afterwards wrote an epistle entitled Al Tehi ka-Aboteka (Be not like thy Fathers) in which he attacked Christianity in such a manner that the superficial reader may take it as a eulogy on that religion. His best work is his philosophic-critical Hebrew grammar entitled Ma’aseh Efod. It is so called because the letters ??? are the initials of ????? ?????? ???.]

The Definition of the Science of Language and Its Branches^[225]

The science of language is a science comprising grammar, rhetoric, and poetry. It is therefore fitting that its definition should be given in a manner that harmonizes with these three branches, and afterwards each of them should be differentiated by its specific characteristic. I say that the science of language is a science which teaches the general methods that may be employed in a language, in a manner fitting the conventionalities of that language. By saying: ‘In a manner fitting’ I wish to convey that the expression must agree with that which is conceived by the mind, according to the linguistic axioms. I call the study of language a science, because the term ‘science’ is indeed more comprehensive than the philosophers think. For they have defined science as an acquisition which the mind attains by true beginnings and causes; by ‘true beginnings’ they mean the beginnings which are known either through the nature of the intellect, as the first principles, or through sense perception, or through experience. According to this, the study of language is no science at all, for its beginnings are conventional, and are not evolved through any of the ways that I have mentioned. In our opinion, however, the term ‘science’ is more comprehensive, for we call science anything that is known through investigation, analogy, or proof, no matter whether the principles and beginnings upon which it is based are essentially true, or arbitrary and conventional. The teacher^[226] has already called such sciences ‘conventional sciences.’ Accordingly, the study of language is a science, and the definition of science rightly applies to it; for by it are known, through investigation and proof, the results derived from principles and beginnings which have been laid down in it. The wise man R. Jonah said in the description of grammar that it signifies investigation and searching. This is merely an interpretation of the term, which does not give us the definition of grammar itself.

Now when a speech is merely in conformity with the principles and rules of the language, without having sweetness, beauty, polish, and embellishment, in the simple and complex forms, and is not free from superfluity or excessive brevity compared with the meaning intended to be conveyed, such a discourse is said to be merely grammatical; the man who essentially and constantly speaks in that manner is said to be a grammarian; and the power by which he speaks in that manner is called grammar. When the speech also has sweetness, beauty, polish, and embellishment, in the simple and complex forms, it is said to be rhetorical (it is derived from the expression: ‘How sweet are Thy words unto my palate!’^[227] which signifies: how sweet and pleasant are they!); the author of such a speech is called a rhetorician, provided that this manner of speech is essential and constant with him; and the capacity which he has for such a speech is called rhetoric. If in addition to all these characteristics, the speech is also metrical, it is called a poem; its author is called a poet, provided this is essential and constant with him; and the capacity which he possesses for that is called poetry. By the word ‘metre’ I mean to say that the portions of the discourse are equal in the number of their vowels (thou already knowest about that). This is called a poem, because by means of the metre it is possible to sing it aloud. The term ‘poem’ has also been applied to anything that is to be understood allegorically, as, for instance, the Song of Songs, and others. The rhetorical discourses and poems of the Jews have a special characteristic which I have not seen or heard in the discourses and poems of other nations. The Jewish rhetoricians and poets add sweetness, beauty, and polish to their sentences by giving their rhetorical discourses and poems the form of the scriptural verses and of the sayings of the wise and by their endeavoring that that form should agree with the meaning of their discourses, either according to the plain meaning of the Bible, or according to some figurative application which they put into the discourse. It is the highest degree of elegance and beauty in rhetoric and rhetoricians when they make their discourses to be in harmony with, and add to them sweetness from, the divine speech. This is due to the circumstance that the Hebrew tongue is now deficient, as was explained, and therefore the rhetoricians, when they wish to render their discourses sweet and elegant, find it necessary to embellish and beautify them with the rhetorical expressions that exist. Accordingly, their loss is cancelled by their gain, and their deficiency turned to advantage. I have likewise noticed that the Jewish rhetoricians possess another peculiarity not shared by the rhetoricians of other nations: the knowledge of grammar comes to them naturally, and their discourses are always in conformity with the principles and rules of the science of language, though they do not study the books that were composed on this science; yet it is only casually, and very rarely, that they commit mistakes or errors according to the principles of the language. One is not to condemn or to blame them for that, for even in the works of nature casual mistakes are sometimes found. This power of theirs with which they were endowed by nature caused them to neglect and disregard the study of the books devoted to the science of language, which are accounted by them as things of nought and confusion.