Biblical Hebrew Forum

["K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Rochelle:

On 10/10/06, rochelle altman <willaa AT netvision.net.il> wrote:
> Karl,
>
> I did not state that BH as we have it shows all the forms.
>
> I do know that the Paleo- frags among the DSS use variant forms.
But even the oldest DSS post date by centuries the changes that
Aramaic imposed on Hebrew by the fact (as I read it) that the
returnies were more at home in Aramaic than Hebrew.

> Corrupted? .... You can't call that "corrupted." A living language changes; 
> Hebrew was a
> living language at the period you are talking about.
Depends on how you define "living language".

> For example, one question that's been floated out here is how far back does
> the use of ADONAI go? From the meter, well, it's used in pre-Monarchial
> psalms... so. I'd hazard 12th-11th-centuries BCE at the very least.
I've seen this as an argument for a tri-syllabic pronunciation of YHWH
(I personally think that the W is the mater lectionis).

> Best regards,
>
> Rochelle

Maybe I should have been more clear about "corrupted". Most of the
time when I think of "corrupted" in this context, I refer to changes
that new influences had on Biblical Hebrew so that it was no longer
the language of David, Isaiah, even Jeremiah. There are two major
changes: 1) the pronunciation, the returnies pronounced the language
according to the Aramaic pronunciations of the alphabet, not
necessarily the Hebrew pronunciation from pre-exilic times, and 2) a
simpler, more direct use of the language than that employed by
pre-exilic writers such as Isaiah, Jeremiah, Psalms, Proverbs and
others. I observe both changes. Those are also indications that Hebrew
was no longer learned at one's mother's knees, but living in the same
manner as Latin is still a living language.

Which leads me back to my original question, what evidence is there
that there were four waws/vavs in pre-exilic Biblical Hebrew? I know
of no pre-exilic epigraphic evidence for it.

Yours, Karl W. Randolph.