The Semantic Field of Cutting Tools in Biblical Hebrew: The Interface of Philological, Semantic, and Archaeological Evidence. By Aaron J. Koller.

2015 ◽  
pp. flv055
Author(s):  
H. G. M. Williamson
2012 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Göran Eidevall

AbstractThis article explores the semantic resources of biblical Hebrew, when it comes to speaking about silence. The aim is to reach more clarity concerning the sense and function of pertinent lexemes, and to contribute to a better understanding of the “semantic field” of silence. It is demonstrated that biblical Hebrew had several verbs with the sense “to be silent” (= abstain from speech), but no noun corresponding to the English word “silence” (denoting a situation characterized by the absence of speech or by the complete lack of audible sounds). However, the domains of silence and stillness overlap. Thus, when the biblical writers wanted to describe a situation of “silence”, they could choose one of several words associated with the wider concept of stillness.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Orit Malka

Abstract The verb הֵעִיד in Biblical Hebrew is understood by most scholars primarily within the semantic field of עֵד, “witness.” However, many of its biblical occurrences do not befit this reading. These were interpreted according to the context, as bearing the meaning of: “to warn,” “to assure,” “to command.” Explaining the connection between all aspects of the verb poses a challenge. The present paper argues that all these meaning are in fact interrelated: they all derive from the meaning of הֵעִיד (and the verbal phrase הֵעִיד בְּ) as implying the imposition of an oath. Oaths are based on the summoning of divine witnesses as guarantors of the sworn undertakings. Convocation of witnesses thus became associated with oaths, and consequently הֵעִיד developed a secondary meaning of imposing an oath. Understanding the verb הֵעִיד as implying the imposition of an oath will reconcile the various meanings attributed to this verb, and unveil the internal links between them.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bill T. Arnold ◽  
John H. Choi
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Bill T. Arnold ◽  
John H. Choi
Keyword(s):  

1998 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
John A Atkinson ◽  
Camilla Dickson ◽  
Jane Downes ◽  
Paul Robins ◽  
David Sanderson

Summary Two small burnt mounds were excavated as part of the programme to mitigate the impact of motorway construction in the Crawford area. The excavations followed a research strategy designed to address questions of date and function. This paper surveys the various competing theories about burnt mounds and how the archaeological evidence was evaluated against those theories. Both sites produced radiocarbon dates from the Bronze Age and evidence to suggest that they were cooking places. In addition, a short account is presented of two further burnt mounds discovered during the construction of the motorway in Annandale.


2017 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Lodge

Pittenweem Priory began life as the caput manor of a daughter-house established on May Island by Cluniac monks from Reading (c. 1140). After its sale to St Andrews (c. 1280), the priory transferred ashore. While retaining its traditional name, the ‘Priory of May (alias Pittenweem)’ was subsumed within the Augustinian priory of St Andrews. Its prior was elected from among the canons of the new mother house, but it was many decades before a resident community of canons was set up in Pittenweem. The traditional view, based principally on the ‘non-conventual’ status of the priory reiterated in fifteenth-century documents, is that there was ‘no resident community’ before the priorship of Andrew Forman (1495–1515). Archaeological evidence in Pittenweem, however, indicates that James Kennedy had embarked on significant development of the priory fifty years earlier. This suggests that, when the term ‘non-conventual’ is used in documents emanating from Kennedy's successors (Graham and Scheves), we should interpret it more as an assertion of superiority and control than as a description of realities in the priory.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-78
Author(s):  
Judith Bronstein ◽  
Elisabeth Yehuda ◽  
Edna J. Stern

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document