The Verb and the Paragraph in Biblical Hebrew

This volume explores an underappreciated feature of the standard Tiberian Masoretic tradition of Biblical Hebrew, namely its composite nature. Focusing on cases of dissonance between the tradition’s written (consonantal) and reading (vocalic) components, the study shows that the Tiberian spelling and pronunciation traditions, though related, interdependent, and largely in harmony, at numerous points reflect distinct oral realisations of the biblical text. Where the extant vocalisation differs from the apparently pre-exilic pronunciation presupposed by the written tradition, the former often exhibits conspicuous affinity with post-exilic linguistic conventions as seen in representative Second Temple material, such as the core Late Biblical Hebrew books, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Ben Sira, rabbinic literature, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and contemporary Aramaic and Syriac material. On the one hand, such instances of written-reading disharmony clearly entail a degree of anachronism in the vocalisation of Classical Biblical Hebrew compositions. On the other, since many of the innovative and secondary features in the Tiberian vocalisation tradition are typical of sources from the Second Temple Period and, in some cases, are documented as minority alternatives in even earlier material, the Masoretic reading tradition is justifiably characterised as a linguistic artefact of profound historical depth.

show abstract

1. The Tetragrammaton

Hornkohl¹

2023

Semitic Languages and Cultures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Historical Depth of the Tiberian Reading Tradition epigraphy and Second Temple deviations in the Tiberian pronunciation tradition.1.0. Ketiv-Qere, Qere Perpetuum, and BeyondThe works that comprise the Hebrew Bible reflect diverse authors, sources, genres, locales, social groups, time periods, and secondary hands. It would be reasonable to expect substantial linguistic diversity. Yet various processes of standardisation have resulted in the levelling of a great deal of the expected diversity, so that the combined Tiberian written-reading tradition is remarkably uniform. Even so, Tiberian BH shows signs of diverse idiolects, registers, genrelects, regional dialects, sociolects, and chronolects.Another aspect of BH diversity stems from variation in the traditions in which the Hebrew Bible has been transmitted. For example, the Tiberian, Babylonian, and Samaritan traditions present different manifestations of BH, with differences ranging from pronunciation to grammar.Even within the dominant Tiberian Masoretic tradition, readers confront differences between the written and reading components of the tradition, i.e., the consonantal text and the vocalisation, respectively. In many places in the text, such dissonance is explicitly acknowledged and marked by the mechanism known as ketiv-qere. In the majority of such cases-the approximate number of which, estimated between 800 and 1500, varies depending on the manuscript and expert opinion (Yeivin 1980, 55; Ofer 2019, 92; Habib 2020, 285)-divergence between what is written (ketiv = the Aramaic passive participle ‫כתיב‬ 'written ') and what is read (qere = the Aramaic passive participle ‫קרי‬ 6 This form may be attested in the phrase ‫ז‬ ַֽ ַ ‫ב‬ ‫לָ‬ ‫ּה‬ ֶ֖ ָ ‫ש‬ ָ ‫ר‬ ‫גְּ‬ ‫מִ‬ ‫ן‬ ‫עַ‬ ֵ֥ ַ ‫מ‬ ‫לְּ‬ (Ezek. 36.5), cf. ESV 'that they might make its pasturelands a prey', but the phrase is also analysable as an Aramaic-style infinitive (see below, ch. 12, §2.2, fn. 17). directional ְּ ‫לָ‬ ָ ‫רּוש‬ ‫יְּ‬ ‫ה‬ ‫מָ‬ yǝrūša ̊la ̊yma ̊)-conflict with the dominant spellings of the name in the written component of the Tiberian 8 Hornkohl (2013a, 91-95). 'to clear away' (1QM 10.1-2; cf. BH ‫ֹל‬ ‫ש‬ ‫נְּ‬ ‫*לִ‬ and RH ‫ל‬ ַ ‫יש‬ ‫-)*לִ‬ 20 The Historical Depth of the Tiberian Reading Tradition the apparent assimilation of n in these forms was possible only after the vowel following n had shortened to zero; 2. the distinction in preposition vocalisation, ‫ל‬ -, on the one hand, versus ‫ב‬ -and ‫כ‬ -, on the other, in qal I-y and II-w/y verbs, e.g., ‫ת‬ ֶ ‫ד‬ ‫לֶ‬ ‫בְּ‬ 'when bearing' versus ‫ת‬ ֶ ‫ד‬ ‫לֶ‬ ‫לָ‬ 'to bear' and ‫בֹוא‬ ‫בְּ‬ 'in coming' and ‫בֹוא‬ ‫כְּ‬ 'after coming' versus ‫בֹוא‬ ‫לָ‬ 'to come (in the Tiberian as well as Babylonian traditions, and with parallels in the Samaritan tradition); 3. the overall rarity of infinitives construct without a preceding preposition in all biblical consonantal traditions and the dominance of infinitives with ‫ל‬ -in late material, e.g., Tiberian LBH, BA, DSS Hebrew, the Hebrew of BS, and RH; 4. the predominantly late char...

show abstract

The Verb and the Paragraph in Biblical Hebrew

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

Quenching Tears: A Note on 2 Kings 22:17 and 19

Quenching Tears: A Note on 2 Kings 22:17 and 19

The Historical Depth of the Tiberian Reading Tradition of Biblical Hebrew

1. The Tetragrammaton

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About