Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>]

>>  I would call Qohelet and
> 4QMMT two different dialects of proto-mishnaic Hebrew on the one
> hand, or simply 'mishnaic Hebrew' when speaking broadly.
>
>You have made this statement a few times, and I am just now getting around
to calling you on it.
>Are you claiming that Qohelet is a document authored
during the second temple period?>

Yes, Qohelet is a Second Temple document.
'pitgam' is Second Temple,
'pardes' is Second Temple.
(1. they pattern as Second Temple in the Hebrew
Bible, 2. they occur in cognate languages of the period, especially Aramaic
and mishnaic Hebrew [though of Persian origin], and 3. they are not accidently
left out of First Temple Hebrew because of lacking an approriate context. Gan
'garden' and 'devar' "word/decree' provided contexts.)
the preponderance of she- 'that' (70xx)
and the frequent use of ve-qatal (50xx) instead of vayyixtov is 'low
dialect' not just
Second Temple, and lines up with mishnaic Hebrew.

Delitzsch's comment 140? years ago, to the effect: "If Qohelet is not a Second
Temple work, there is no history to the Hebrew language."



-- 
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth AT gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life