Noonan's article strikes me as very important in the discussion of the history of the Exodus. I appreciate all the prior comments. There was indeed regular migration AND garrisons of Egyptians in Canaan (as noted above), but the point is not to (pretend to) settle the matter here, but to use this as a launch point for research on linguistic borrowing, as well as dating of texts. I've long appreciated Noonan's article and wish there were more follow-on research that either builds on it or demonstrates alternatives. Too many scholars -- notably many archaeologists -- seem to lack the basic knowledge of the process of linguistic borrowing (from either prestige cultures or those whose market impact requires it). This is a good resource for them (and us).
Noonan's article strikes me as very important in the discussion of the history of the Exodus. I appreciate all the prior comments. There was indeed regular migration AND garrisons of Egyptians in Canaan (as noted above), but the point is not to (pretend to) settle the matter here, but to use this as a launch point for research on linguistic borrowing, as well as dating of texts. I've long appreciated Noonan's article and wish there were more follow-on research that either builds on it or demonstrates alternatives. Too many scholars -- notably many archaeologists -- seem to lack the basic knowledge of the process of linguistic borrowing (from either prestige cultures or those whose market impact requires it). This is a good resource for them (and us).