[b-hebrew] Ex 6:6 hiphil imperative 'bring'

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Tue Jul 16 09:41:05 EDT 2013


Chavoux:

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Chavoux Luyt <chavoux at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Karl
>
> On 16 July 2013 05:43, <b-hebrew-request at lists.ibiblio.org> wrote:
>
>> Send b-hebrew mailing list submissions to
>>         b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
>>
>>  ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: K Randolph <kwrandolph at gmail.com>
>> <snip>
>> By the way, can you document any changes that happened to Biblical Hebrew
>> language during the 800 years from Moses to Nebuchadnezzar when it was a
>> natively spoken language?
>>
> First off, it is known from surrounding ANE countries that scribes
> normally updated the language (grammar, spelling and sometimes vocabulary)
> when they copied a previous work. Understanding was more important than
> keeping archaisms. So it is reasonable that the same process happened in
> Biblical Hebrew.
>

Reasonable, but still speculation. Would the temple scribes have put up
with such? Was the careful copying an innovation during the DSS period, or
a continuation of a practice from before?


> I also think it would be good to compare the spelling used in the tunnel
> of Hezekiah to that used in our later copies of the Tanach. If I remember
> correctly, there is much less use of plene spelling (matres lectionis).
>

I have an electronic copy of the Siloam Inscription—except for one word,
where I think many scholars are wrong in saying “fire” should be “man”—the
rest of the “matres lectionis” uses are entirely consistent with
pre-Babylonian uses in Tanakh.


>  I would assume that even though some archaisms survived in the older
> texts, most of the language would be updated as was normal at the time.
>

Israel, when it followed Tanakh, was different in other ways, why not this
way too?


> One glaring example of change is the use of the male הוא (hu) for females
> instead of היא (hi) found only in the Torah and in none of the later books.
>

I thought this pattern was more widespread than this.

There are stylistic differences that are noticeable, but what I’m looking
for are linguistic changes.

>
> Shalom
> Chavoux Luyt
>
> Thanks, Chavoux.

Karl W. Randolph.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/attachments/20130716/677059da/attachment.html 


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list