DOCSLIB.ORG

A Bibliography of Ugaritic Grammar and Biblical Hebrew Grammar in the Twentieth Century

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Bibliography of Ugaritic Grammar and Biblical Hebrew Grammar in the Twentieth Century A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF UGARITIC GRAMMAR AND BIBLICAL HEBREW GRAMMAR IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY MARK S. SMITH Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies New York University http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/DEPT/RA/bibs/BH-Ugaritic.html Last Modified: May 2004 i http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/DEPT/RA/bibs/BH-Ugaritic.html TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. x Purpose .................................................................................................................................... x Origins and Acknowledgements........................................................................................................... xi STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................................. xiii 1. BASIC TEXTS AND TOOLS................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. General and Historical Linguistics.................................................................................................. 1 1.1.2. Afroasiastic and Semitic Languages ....................................................................................... 3 1.2. Ugaritic .................................................................................................................................... 8 1.2.1. General Introductions .......................................................................................................... 8 1.2.2. Texts................................................................................................................................8 1.2.2.1. Resources for Text-Information .................................................................................... 9 1.2.3. Grammars and Grammatical Studies of Ugaritic ....................................................................... 9 1.2.4. Dictionaries for Ugaritic....................................................................................................... 10 1.2.5. Concordances .................................................................................................................... 10 1.2.6. Further Resources for Studying Ugaritic.................................................................................. 11 1.2.6.1. Bibliographies of Ugaritic Studies ................................................................................. 11 1.2.6.2. Major Journals publishing in Ugaritic Studies.................................................................. 11 1.2.6.3. Translations of Ugaritic Texts....................................................................................... 11 1.2.6.4. Internet Resources...................................................................................................... 12 1.2.7. The Relation of Ugaritic to Other Semitic Languages ................................................................ 13 1.2.8. Other Second Millennium West Semitic Languages................................................................... 14 1.3. Hebrew .................................................................................................................................... 16 1.3.1. Bibliography...................................................................................................................... 16 1.3.2. General Works in Grammar .................................................................................................. 16 1.3.2.1. Biblical Hebrew......................................................................................................... 16 1.3.2.2. Epigraphic Hebrew..................................................................................................... 18 1.3.3. Grammars of Specific Biblical Books or Passages..................................................................... 19 1.3.4. Hebrew and Other Semitic Languages .................................................................................... 34 1.3.4.1. Surveys of Research ................................................................................................... 34 1.3.4.2. The Relation of Hebrew to Other Semitic Languages ........................................................ 34 1.3.5. Stages/Dialects of Hebrew in the Iron I-Persian Periods ............................................................. 35 1.3.5.1. Early Hebrew ............................................................................................................ 35 1.3.5.2. North versus South ..................................................................................................... 35 1.3.5.3. Regional Dialects ....................................................................................................... 36 1.3.5.4. Hebrew in Direct Discourse and Narrative ...................................................................... 37 1.3.5.4.1. Studies............................................................................................................. 37 1.3.5.4.2. Context for Direct Discourse and Speech-Act Theory ............................................... 39 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.3.5.4.3. Bilingualism ..................................................................................................... 40 1.3.5.4.4. Hebrew Language and the Culture of Israel............................................................. 41 1.3.5.5. Pre-exilic versus Post-exilic Hebrew .............................................................................. 41 1.3.5.5.1. General Works .................................................................................................. 41 1.3.5.5.2. Texts for Study of Samuel and Kings versus Chronicles ............................................ 44 1.3.6. Other First Millennium West Semitic Languages ...................................................................... 44 2. ALPHABET .................................................................................................................................... 48 2.1. Ugaritic .................................................................................................................................... 48 2.2. Old West Semitic (non-cuneiform) and the Origin of the Alphabet........................................................ 49 2.3. From West Semitic to the Periphery: South Semitic and Greek Alphabets .............................................. 50 2.3.1. South and West Semitic Alphabets......................................................................................... 50 2.3.2. Greek Borrowing of the Phoenician Alphabet........................................................................... 50 2.4. Textual Uses of the Alphabet in Hebrew.......................................................................................... 51 2.4.1. Alphabetic Acrostics ........................................................................................................... 51 2.4.2. Atbash.............................................................................................................................. 51 2.4.3. “Shared Consonants”........................................................................................................... 51 3. CONSONANTAL PHONOLOGY.......................................................................................................... 52 3.1. Ugaritic .................................................................................................................................... 52 3.2. Hebrew .................................................................................................................................... 52 3.2.1. General Works ................................................................................................................... 52 3.2.2. Sibilants............................................................................................................................ 53 3.2.3. Gutturals........................................................................................................................... 53 3.2.4. l, m, n, r ............................................................................................................................ 54 4. PHONOLOGY OF VOWELS................................................................................................................ 55 4.1. Ugaritic .................................................................................................................................... 55 4.2. Hebrew .................................................................................................................................... 55 4.2.1. General Works ................................................................................................................... 55 4.2.2. Vowels ............................................................................................................................. 55 4.2.3. Philippi's Law .................................................................................................................... 56 4.2.4. Diphthongs........................................................................................................................ 57 4.2.5. Vowel Sandhi .................................................................................................................... 57 4.2.6. Stress and Vowel Changes...................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Copyright © 2014 Richard Charles Mcdonald All Rights Reserved. The
    Copyright © 2014 Richard Charles McDonald All rights reserved. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has permission to reproduce and disseminate this document in any form by any means for purposes chosen by the Seminary, including, without, limitation, preservation or instruction. GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS BIBLICAL HEBREW TEXTS ACCORDING TO A TRADITIONAL SEMITIC GRAMMAR __________________ A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary __________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy __________________ by Richard Charles McDonald December 2014 APPROVAL SHEET GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS BIBLICAL HEBREW TEXTS ACCORDING TO A TRADITIONAL SEMITIC GRAMMAR Richard Charles McDonald Read and Approved by: __________________________________________ Russell T. Fuller (Chair) __________________________________________ Terry J. Betts __________________________________________ John B. Polhill Date______________________________ I dedicate this dissertation to my wife, Nancy. Without her support, encouragement, and love I could not have completed this arduous task. I also dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Charles and Shelly McDonald, who instilled in me the love of the Lord and the love of His Word. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................vi LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................vii
    [Show full text]
  • Attitudes Towards Linguistic Diversity in the Hebrew Bible
    Many Peoples of Obscure Speech and Difficult Language: Attitudes towards Linguistic Diversity in the Hebrew Bible The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Power, Cian Joseph. 2015. Many Peoples of Obscure Speech and Difficult Language: Attitudes towards Linguistic Diversity in the Hebrew Bible. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:23845462 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA MANY PEOPLES OF OBSCURE SPEECH AND DIFFICULT LANGUAGE: ATTITUDES TOWARDS LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN THE HEBREW BIBLE A dissertation presented by Cian Joseph Power to The Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts August 2015 © 2015 Cian Joseph Power All rights reserved. Dissertation Advisor: Professor Peter Machinist Cian Joseph Power MANY PEOPLES OF OBSCURE SPEECH AND DIFFICULT LANGUAGE: ATTITUDES TOWARDS LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN THE HEBREW BIBLE Abstract The subject of this dissertation is the awareness of linguistic diversity in the Hebrew Bible—that is, the recognition evident in certain biblical texts that the world’s languages differ from one another. Given the frequent role of language in conceptions of identity, the biblical authors’ reflections on language are important to examine.
    [Show full text]
  • From Root to Nunation: the Morphology of Arabic Nouns
    From Root to Nunation: The Morphology of Arabic Nouns Abdullah S. Alghamdi A thesis in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Humanities and Languages Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences March 2015 PLEASE TYPE THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Thesis/Dissertation Sheet Surname or Family name: Alghamdi First name: Abdullah Other name/s: Abbreviation for degree as given in the University calendar: PhD School: Humanities and Languages Faculty: Arts and Social Sciences Title: From root to nunation: The morphology of Arabic nouns. Abstract 350 words maximum: (PLEASE TYPE) This thesis explores aspects of the morphology of Arabic nouns within the theoretical framework of Distributed Morphology (as developed by Halle and Marantz, 1993; 1994, and many others). The theory distributes the morphosyntactic, phonological and semantic properties of words among several components of grammar. This study examines the roots and the grammatical features of gender, number, case and definiteness that constitute the structure of Arabic nouns. It shows how these constituents are represented across different types of nouns. This study supports the view that roots are category-less, and merge with the category-assigning feature [n], forming nominal stems. It also shows that compositional semantic features, e.g., ‘humanness’, are not a property of the roots, but are rather inherent to [n]. This study supports the hypothesis that roots are individuated by indices and the proposal that these indices are conceptual in nature. It is shown that indices may activate special language-specific rules by which certain types of Arabic nouns are formed. Furthermore, this study argues that the masculine feature [-F] is prohibited from remaining part of the structure of Arabic nonhuman plurals.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded from Brill.Com09/25/2021 11:36:06AM Via Free Access Hybridity Versus Revivability 41
    HYBRIDITY VERSUS REVIVABILITY: MULTIPLE CAUSATION, FORMS AND PATTERNS Ghil‘ad Zuckermann Associate Professor and ARC Discovery Fellow in Linguistics The University of Queensland, Australia Abstract The aim of this article is to suggest that due to the ubiquitous multiple causation, the revival of a no-longer spoken language is unlikely without cross-fertilization from the revivalists’ mother tongue(s). Thus, one should expect revival efforts to result in a language with a hybridic genetic and typological character. The article highlights salient morphological constructions and categories, illustrating the difficulty in determining a single source for the grammar of Israeli, somewhat misleadingly a.k.a. ‘Modern Hebrew’. The European impact in these features is apparent inter alia in structure, semantics or productivity. Multiple causation is manifested in the Congruence Principle, according to which if a feature exists in more than one contributing language, it is more likely to persist in the emerging language. Consequently, the reality of linguistic genesis is far more complex than a simple family tree system allows. ‘Revived’ languages are unlikely to have a single parent. The multisourced nature of Israeli and the role of the Congruence Principle in its genesis have implications for historical linguistics, language planning and the study of language, culture and identity. “Linguistic and social factors are closely interrelated in the development of language change. Explanations which are confined to one or the other aspect, no matter how well constructed, will fail to account for the rich body of regularities that can be observed in empirical studies of language behavior.” Weinreich, Labov & Herzog 1968: 188.
    [Show full text]
  • The Accusative Case the Accusative Case Is Applied to the Direct Object of the Verb
    The Accusative Case The accusative case is applied to the direct object of the verb. For example “I studied the .Notice several things about this sentence درس ُت الكتا ب book” is rendered in Arabic as is not used in the sentence. Such pronouns are usually not أنا ”,First, the pronoun for “I used, since the verb conjugation tells us who the subject is. These pronouns are used sometimes for emphasis. Second, notice that I left most of the verb unvowelled. The only vowel I used is the vowel that tells you for which person the verb is being conjugated. Sometimes you may see such a vowel included in an authentic Arab text if there is a chance of ambiguity. However, usually the verb, like all words, will be completely unvocalized. Notice that the verb ends in a vowel and that the vowel will elide the hamza on the definite article. ends in a fatha. The fatha is the accusative case الكتا ب ,Fourth, the direct object of the verb marker. I studied a document.” Notice that two fathas are used“ درس ُت وثيقة :Look at this sentence here. The second fatha gives us the nunation. This is just like the other two cases, nominative and genitive where the second dhanuna and second kasra provide the nunation. So, we use one fatha if the word is definite and two fathas if the word is indefinite. But there درست كتابا :is just a little bit more. Look at the following This is “I studied a book.” Here the indefinite direct object ends in two fathas but we have also added an alif.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing Systems Reading and Spelling
    Writing systems Reading and spelling Writing systems LING 200: Introduction to the Study of Language Hadas Kotek February 2016 Hadas Kotek Writing systems Writing systems Reading and spelling Outline 1 Writing systems 2 Reading and spelling Spelling How we read Slides credit: David Pesetsky, Richard Sproat, Janice Fon Hadas Kotek Writing systems Writing systems Reading and spelling Writing systems What is writing? Writing is not language, but merely a way of recording language by visible marks. –Leonard Bloomfield, Language (1933) Hadas Kotek Writing systems Writing systems Reading and spelling Writing systems Writing and speech Until the 1800s, writing, not spoken language, was what linguists studied. Speech was often ignored. However, writing is secondary to spoken language in at least 3 ways: Children naturally acquire language without being taught, independently of intelligence or education levels. µ Many people struggle to learn to read. All human groups ever encountered possess spoken language. All are equal; no language is more “sophisticated” or “expressive” than others. µ Many languages have no written form. Humans have probably been speaking for as long as there have been anatomically modern Homo Sapiens in the world. µ Writing is a much younger phenomenon. Hadas Kotek Writing systems Writing systems Reading and spelling Writing systems (Possibly) Independent Inventions of Writing Sumeria: ca. 3,200 BC Egypt: ca. 3,200 BC Indus Valley: ca. 2,500 BC China: ca. 1,500 BC Central America: ca. 250 BC (Olmecs, Mayans, Zapotecs) Hadas Kotek Writing systems Writing systems Reading and spelling Writing systems Writing and pictures Let’s define the distinction between pictures and true writing.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing Like an Ancient Scribe the Earliest Alphabet
    Writing Like an Ancient Scribe The Earliest Alphabet Topics: Communication Image credit: Coron’s Sources of Fonts (Geocities) Writing, Languages Students play the role of Ugaritic scribes in this activity when they use a stylus to Materials List stamp cone-shaped marks into clay. Polymer clay Roller (to flatten To Do and Notice clay) (optional) 1. Roll out polymer clay into 5 mm (~1/4”) slabs. Triangular game 2. Use the game piece or other triangular stylus to imprint letters into the clay using piece or other the Ugaritic alphabet table on page 2. similar object to use as a stylus The Content Behind the Activity Learning an alphabet means recognizing a squiggle, line or other form as a sound. This process is decoding, whether it involves reading English written in the Roman alphabet or the oldest known alphabet: Ugaritic, a cuneiform alphabet written into clay tablets. This activity can be used The development of written language ranks high among important events in the to teach: history of human technology. Cuneiform writing dates back 5500 years, to the Knowledge and “cradle of civilization”, the Middle East. Several written forms used these cone- understanding of the shaped marks, including the Sumerians in Mesopotamia (current-day Iraq). However, past (National the Ugaritic alphabet is considered the first true alphabet (as opposed to writing based Curriculum for Social Studies: Theme 2, on syllables or words), and the letter order eventually influenced the Greek and Time, Continuity, & Roman alphabets. This writing system was employed in the city of Ugarit, located in Change) western Syria from around 1300 BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • Officers of the Society 1970-71
    CONTENTS PAGE Frontispiece: Professor David Winton Thomas .. .. 4 Officers of the Society .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 News of the Society Notices and Reports .. .. .. .. .. 6-9 A Personal Note .. .. .. .. .. 9 St Catharine's Gild 10 The Society's Finances .. .. .. .. .. 11 The General Meeting of the Society, 1970 .. .. 12-13 The Quincentenary Appeal Accounts .. .. .. 14 The Quincentenary Accounts .. .. .. .. 15 The Annual Dinner, 1970 16-17 Engagements .. .. .. .. .. .. 18 Marriages .. .. .. .. .. .. 18-19 Births 19-20 Deaths 21 Obituaries 22-27 Ecclesiastical Appointments .. .. .. .. 28 Miscellaneous .. .. .. .. .. .. 29-36 Publications 37-39 News of the College College News Letter 40-43 The College Societies 44-50 Academic Distinctions .. .. .. .. .. 51-52 Articles The World of Music .. 53-54 ' Let us now praise famous men ' .. .. .. 54-55 Illustrations Interlude .. .. .. .. .. .. (facing) 10 Degree Day 1970 40 Another Year Ends .. .. .. .. .. 44 Professor David Winton Thomas Fellow of St Catharine's 1943-1969 SEPTEMBER 1970 Officers of the Society 1970-71 President Sydney Smith, PH.D., M.A. Vice-Presidents C. R. Allison, M.A. R. T. Pemberton C. Belfield Clarke, M.A. D. Portway, C.B.E., T.D., D.L., M.A. C. R. Benstead, M.C, M.A. The Reverend F. E. Smith, M.A. Sir Frank Bower, C.B.E., M.A. A. Stephenson, M.A. R. F. Champness, M.A., LL.M. A. H. Thomas, LL.D., M.A. R. Davies, C.M.G., M.A. Sir Augustus Walker, K.C.B., Sir Norman Elliott, C.B.E., M.A. C.B.E., D.S.O., D.F.C, M.A. A. A. Heath, M.A. E. Williamson, M.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Encoded Representations for Distinct Positional Uses of Hebrew Meteg Peter Constable, Microsoft Corporation 2004-09-13
    Encoded representations for distinct positional uses of Hebrew Meteg Peter Constable, Microsoft Corporation 2004-09-13 In some uses of the Hebrew script, particularly for Biblical text, a variety of combining marks are used. One of these marks is meteg, encoded as U+05BD, HEBREW POINT METEG. Meteg frequently occurs together with other combining marks. When meteg co-occurs with another mark that occupies the same general space below the base character, different relative arrangements of meteg and these other marks are possible. In some uses it is considered necessary to specify these relative arrangements of meteg and other marks in the encoded representation. A proposal1 has been submitted to UTC for how these different positionings of meteg should be specified in encoded representations. This proposal makes use of the control characters COMBINING GRAPHEME JOINER (CGJ), ZERO WIDTH JOINER (ZWJ) and ZERO WIDTH NON-JOINER (ZWNJ). This public-review issue is soliciting feedback on this proposal and, in particular, on the proposed use of ZWJ and ZWNJ for distinguishing between the different positional uses of the meteg. The details in this case are somewhat complex. Familiarity with combining marks, canonical combining classes, canonical ordering and canonical equivalence is assumed. Some background information on those topics is provided in an appendix. 1. Background: meteg in combination with below-base vowel marks Biblical Hebrew text includes a number of marks used to annotate the text, which were introduced by Masoretic scholars over a thousand years ago. These marks include vowel points and a number of accentuation marks that indicate structural units of the text, serving to guide the reader or chanter.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Things That Concordances Do Not Tell You
    358 The Testimony, September 2001 “walk away” is indicative of the hold which John Paul II and the Palestinian leader Yasser the Middle East has on the nations of the world. Arafat. As events continue to develop in the Mid- The article goes on to write of how the European dle East we should exhort one another as we see Union has been involved and how (in MacAskill’s the day approaching (Heb. 10:25). Let us remain opinion) there is scope for more involvement in faithful so that we might be with Christ as he the crisis. The Catholic Church is also increas- marches through Bozrah (Isa. 34:6) and moves to ingly becoming involved in the crisis. On 2 Au- Israel to carry out the “recompences for the con- gust 2001 a meeting took place between Pope troversy of Zion” (v. 8). 1234 1234 1234 EDITOR: John Nicholls, 17 Upper Trinity Road, Halstead, 1234 1234 1234 Essex, CO9 1EE. Tel. 01787 473089; 1234 1234 e-mail: [email protected] 1234 1234 Reviews 1234 1234 Some things that concordances do not tell you John Carder N ENGLISH the tense of a verb shows its That form is often referred to as the stem or root relation to time, that is, past tense, present of the verb. Itense or future tense. English is a very time- From that basic and most simple form, usu- orientated language, with distinct tenses. The ally consisting of just three Hebrew letters, all Hebrew of the Bible is completely different. It other parts of each Hebrew verb are derived.
    [Show full text]
  • Inflectional and Derivational Hebrew Morphology According to the Theory of Phonology As Human Behavior
    BEN- GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV FACULTY OF HUMINITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LITERATURES AND LINGUISTICS INFLECTIONAL AND DERIVATIONAL HEBREW MORPHOLOGY ACCORDING TO THE THEORY OF PHONOLOGY AS HUMAN BEHAVIOR THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS LINA PERELSHTEIN UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: PROFESSOR YISHAI TOBIN FEBRUARY 2008 BEN- GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV FACULTY OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LITERATURES AND LINGUISTICS INFLECTIONAL AND DERIVATIONAL HEBREW MORPHOLOGY ACCORDING TO THE THEORY OF PHONOLOGY AS HUMAN BEHAVIOR THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS LINA PERELSHTEIN UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF PROFESSOR YISHAI TOBIN Signature of student: ________________ Date: _________ Signature of supervisor: _____________ Date: _________ Signature of chairperson of the committee for graduate studies: ______________ Date: _________ FEBRUARY 2008 ABSTRACT This research deals with the phonological distribution of Hebrew Inflectional and Derivational morphology, synchronically and diachronically. The scope of this study is suffixes, due to the fact that final position bears grammatical information, while initial position bears lexical items. In order to analyze the gathered data, the theory of Phonology as Human Behavior will be employed. The theory classifies language as a system of signs which is used by human beings to communicate; it is based on the synergetic principle of maximum communication with minimal effort. This research shows that the similarity within Modern Hebrew inflectional and derivational suffix system is greater than the derivational Modern Hebrew – Biblical Hebrew system in terms of a specialized suffix system and that the phonological distribution of Hebrew suffixes is motivated by the principles of the theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew and Related Fields
    Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew and Related Fields Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew and Related Fields Proceedings of the Yale Symposium on Mishnaic Hebrew, May 2014 Editors Elitzur A. Bar-Asher Siegal and Aaron J. Koller The Program in Judaic Studies The Center for Jewish Languages and Literatures Yale University, New Haven The Hebrew University, Jerusalem Copyeditor: Shirley Zauer Indexes: Adam Parker ISBN 978-965-481-067-8 Distribution: Magnes Press P.O. Box 39099, Jerusalem 9139002 Tel. 972-2-6586659, Fax 972-2-5660341 www.magnespress.co.il Computer Typesetting: Judith Sternberg Production: The Academy of the Hebrew Language Jerusalem, 2017 Contents Introduction VII Chanan Ariel Deviations from Mishnaic Hebrew Syntax in Mishneh Torah Due to the Influence of Arabic: Subordination or Intentional Usage? 1 Moshe Bar-Asher Problems in the Description of the Morphology of Mishnaic Hebrew 37 Elitzur A. Bar-Asher Towards a Reconsideration of the Siegal Tense-Aspect-Mood System of Tannaitic Hebrew 59 Gabriel Birnbaum Phonological and Morphological Studies in MS Antonin 262 (Mishnah Seder Teharoth) 93 Steven E. Fassberg The Language of the Bet ʿAmar Papyrus in Light of Other Judean Desert Documents 113 Steven D. Fraade The Innovation of Nominalized Verbs in Mishnaic Hebrew as Marking an Innovation of Concept 129 Aaron Koller The Social and Geographic Origins of Mishnaic Hebrew 149 Aharon Maman Rabbinic Hebrew in the Eyes of Medieval Hebrew Philologists 175 Emmanuel Mastey Cases of Semantic Variation in Mishnaic Hebrew: The Verbs hillēḵ and qāraṣ 189 Michael
    [Show full text]