Diachronic Exceptions in the Comparison of Tiberian and Qumran Hebrew: The Preservation of Early Linguistic Features in Dead Sea Scrolls Biblical Hebrew

In this article, I discuss three statistical tools that have proven pivotal in linguistic research, particularly those studies that seek to evaluate large datasets. These tools are the Gaussian Curve, significance tests, and hierarchical clustering. I present a brief description of these tools and their general uses. Then, I apply them to an analysis of the variations between the “biblical” DSS and our other witnesses, focusing upon variations involving particles. Finally, I engage the recent debate surrounding the diachronic study of Biblical Hebrew. This article serves a dual function. First, it presents statistical tools that are useful for many linguistic studies. Second, it develops an analysis of the he-locale, as it is used in the “biblical” Dead Sea Scrolls, Masoretic Text, and Samaritan Pentateuch. Through that analysis, this article highlights the value of inferential statistical tools as we attempt to better understand the Hebrew of our ancient witnesses.

Download Full-text

Dead Sea Scrolls: Linguistic Features (Vol 1)

Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics ◽

10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_ehll_com_00000277 ◽

2014 ◽

Keyword(s):

Dead Sea Scrolls ◽

Dead Sea ◽

Linguistic Features

Download Full-text

Discord between the Tiberian Written and Reading Traditions

Semitic Languages and Cultures - Studies in Semitic Vocalisation and Reading Traditions ◽

10.11647/obp.0207.07 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 227-280

Author(s):

Aaron D. Hornkohl

Keyword(s):

Hebrew Bible ◽

Dead Sea Scrolls ◽

Second Temple ◽

Dead Sea ◽

Biblical Hebrew ◽

Linguistic Development ◽

Second Temple Period ◽

Real Language ◽

The Dead ◽

Biblical Sources

Aaron Hornkohl examines two features in the Tiberian reading tradition of Biblical Hebrew, namely the qal construct infinitive and the 3ms possessive suffix that is attached to plural nouns and some prepositions. The article argues that although the vocalisation in both cases is secondary relative to what is represented by the consonantal text, it is not artificial and post-biblical, but rather a relatively ancient product of the real language situation of an earlier period, namely, the Second Temple Period, if not earlier. The view that the vocalisation has such historical depth and is the result of natural linguistic development is often dismissed by biblical scholars. By examining the distribution of forms within the Tiberian Masoretic version of the Hebrew Bible and in extra-biblical sources, especially the Dead Sea Scrolls and First Temple period epigraphy, Hornkohl convincingly demonstrates that the incongruity between the vocalisation and the consonantal text is earlier than Rabbinic Hebrew (second–third centuries CE).

Download Full-text

The contribution of Qumran to historical Hebrew linguistics: Evidence from the syntax of participial negation

HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies ◽

10.4102/hts.v72i4.3150 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 72 (4) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jacobus A. Naudé ◽

Cynthia L. Miller-Naudé

Keyword(s):

Historical Linguistics ◽

Dead Sea Scrolls ◽

Dead Sea ◽

Biblical Hebrew ◽

Distinct Stage ◽

Hebrew Linguistics

In this article we examine how Qumran Hebrew can contribute to our knowledge of historical Hebrew linguistics. The premise of this paper is that Qumran Hebrew reflects a distinct stage in the development of Hebrew which sets it apart from Biblical Hebrew. It is further assumed that these unique features are able to assist us to understand the nature of the development of Biblical Hebrew in a more precise way. Evidence from the syntax of participial negation at Qumran as opposed to Biblical Hebrew provides evidence for this claim.Keywords: Qumran Hebrew; Biblical Hebrew; historical linguistics;l Dead Sea Scrolls

Download Full-text

ARAMAISMS: NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE

Journal for Semitics ◽

10.25159/1013-8471/2570 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 25 (2) ◽

pp. 1080-1103

Author(s):

Richard Dean

Keyword(s):

Dead Sea Scrolls ◽

Dead Sea ◽

Biblical Hebrew ◽

Reliable Criterion ◽

The Bible ◽

Masoretic Text

For approximately two centuries scholars have sought to identify “Aramaisms” in Biblical Hebrew texts and utilise their presence as evidence for a post-exilic date of composition. In this article it is demonstrated that many features which have historically been identified as Aramaisms were not stable during the transmission of the Bible, as the presence or absence of Aramaic elements varies between the Masoretic Text and the biblical Dead Sea Scrolls. It is thus argued that the presence of Aramaisms is not a reliable criterion for linguistic dating as Aramaisms could often reflect Aramaic influence during a stage of the text’s transmission, rather than the time of its composition.

Download Full-text

The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Tiberian Reading Tradition

Dead Sea Discoveries ◽

10.1163/15685179-bja10012 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 27 (3) ◽

pp. 410-425

Author(s):

Aaron D. Hornkohl

Keyword(s):

Iron Age ◽

Dead Sea Scrolls ◽

Second Temple ◽

Dead Sea ◽

Biblical Hebrew ◽

Second Temple Period ◽

Historical Continuity ◽

The Dead ◽

The One ◽

Age Features

Abstract The most authentic portrait of Second Temple Hebrew is afforded by the Dead Sea Scrolls, especially by those texts actually composed in Hellenistic and Roman times. On salient linguistic points Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew agrees with the vocalization of the Tiberian reading tradition against the testimony of the written, i.e., consonantal, tradition of Masoretic Classical Biblical Hebrew material. This article presents a case study. On the one hand, these Dead Sea-Tiberian vocalization affinities are evidence of the relatively late character of their respective linguistic traditions and of the secondary character of the developments in the Tiberian reading tradition vis-à-vis the classical biblical written tradition. On the other hand, these same affinities demonstrate that the Tiberian pronunciation tradition is plausibly regarded as one that crystallized in the Second Temple Period, rather than in Byzantine or medieval times. Lastly, since joint Dead Sea-Tiberian reading departures from the classical biblical consonantal tradition constitute a tiny minority of their relevant linguistic data, most of which are characterized by historical continuity and/or linguistic heterogeneity of comparable historical depth, it is clear that the Second Temple crystallization of Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew and the Tiberian reading tradition in no way preclude their routine preservation of authentic Iron Age features.

Download Full-text