classical hebrew (was: Is there a difference...?)

Dr. Reinhard G.Lehmann lehmann at
Wed Jun 19 10:38:38 EDT 2002

Dear Uri, and all.

I did not have special northern material in mind - as you know, there's only few. I will have a look.
But I am not as sure that even the southern epigraphic material is SBH (or, as you wrote, "very much like").

In that very moment I had in mind the passage in Arad 24:17-19
wdbrhmlk.'tkm/bnb$km. hnh $lxty lh*yd/bkm.hym.h'n$ym.'t.'ly$/*

It does not sound to me very much like SBH, but seems to be a kind of military colloquial... or am I wrong?
And what is about the syntax of the Siloam tunnel inscription? Is it really SBH? - okay, do we already know what ist
And the syntax of Yabneh Yam sound to me strange in the first lines, but admittedly that depends on what one reads in
those lines.


> Subject: Is there a difference  (re "classical Hebrew")
> From: "uri hurwitz" <uhurwitz at>
> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:34:51 -0400
> X-Message-Number: 3
>   In his answer to the question about what may termed 'classical H',
> Reinhard Lehmann was of course right: it is a matter of personal
> preference.
>   Also in his answer he says: "This alltogether is mostly Biblical
> Hebrew,whom the language of early inscriptions should relate in some
> way(but that's not so easy at all)."
>   Now, I'm puzzled by the bracketed statement -- the epigraphic material
> from Yabneh Yam  ( the poor fellow whose clothing was taken away), some of
> the Lakhish letters, or Arad ostraca reads very much like standard BH.
>    Did Reinhard have Northern material in mind?         Uri Hurwitz

       Dr.  Reinhard G. Lehmann
       Forschungsstelle fuer Althebraeische Sprache
       Johannes-Gutenberg Universitaet Mainz
       D - 55099 Mainz
       tel: (+49) 6131 - 39 23284
       mailto:lehmann at
       http home:
       look at:
       look at:

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list