DOCSLIB.ORG

A Concise Historical Morphology of Biblical Hebrew

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Concise Historical Morphology of Biblical Hebrew appendix A Concise Historical Morphology of Biblical Hebrew We have considered the most important sound changes from Proto-Northwest-Semitic to Biblical Hebrew. This appendix reviews the consequences of these developments for the historical morphology of the inflected word classes of Biblical Hebrew: pronouns, nouns and adjectives, numerals, and verbs. Frequent reference is made to the chapters discussing individual sound changes. 1 Pronouns The personal pronouns, both independent and suffixed, are discussed in detail in Chap- ter 8. :derives from the old genitive *ḏī ֶזה The masculine near demonstrative pronoun word-final stressed *-ī > *-ē and word-final *-ē > *-ɛ̄. The associated nominative *ḏū and the accusative *ḏā developed to the זוּ regularly yields the rare relative pronoun ,is difficult to reconstruct ֵ֫אֶלּה due to the Canaanite Shift.The plural זוֹ/זֹה demonstrative with different Semitic languages showing irreconcilable forms.The Hebrew form seems to go back to *ʔillay: the unstressed diphthong contracted to *-ē and then participated in the shift to *-ɛ̄ in word-final position. , ֶזה < does not show the same shift as *ḏī ִמי As the animate interrogative pronoun it should not be reconstructed with word-final *-ī, but as *mīya. The inanimate inter- with gemination of the following consonant) goes ַמה־ normally) ָמה rogative pronoun back to *mah. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004390263_011 Benjamin D. Suchard - 9789004390263 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 07:59:23AM via free access 232 appendix 2 Nouns and Adjectives1 2.1 Roots with One or Two Radicals also used before , ִפּי mouth’ has only one radical. The construct state‘ ֶפּה ,Synchronically suffixes, derives from *pī, originally the construct state genitive.2 This was either gen- eralized to the absolute state, where stressed word-final *-ī shifted to *-ē and fur- ther to *-ɛ̄, or the absolute state regularly developed from *pīm > *pím > *pém > *pḗ. man’ (only attested in the plural) should‘ * ֵמת bottom’, and‘ ֵשׁת ,’name‘ ֵשׁם ,’son‘ ֵבּן be reconstructed as biradical *qṭum nouns without a vowel between the first and sec- ond radical (Testen 1985, Blau 2006).3 The loss of mimation and the case vowel in the singular was probably analogous to their deletion in all other nominals. In the unsuf- fixed singular, an epenthetic vowel *e was inserted to break up the consonant cluster. his‘ ְשׁמוֹ ,’my son‘ ְבִּני The lack of an original vowel can still be seen before suffixes, as in -forms the irreg ֵבּן .men’, all without pretonic lengthening‘ ְמִתים name’, and in the plural banīma, a form which is at least Proto-West-Semitic (cf. its reflexes* > ָבִּנים ular plural has extended the singular stem to the ֵשׁם in Arabic and Modern South Arabian), and . ֵשׁמוֹת ,plural Nouns with a short vowel between their first and second radical undergo tonic and ֶשׂה < hands’. *śayum‘ ָי ַ֫דִים < hand’, *yadayma‘ ָיד < pretonic lengthening, e.g. *yadum ‘sheep’ shows triphthong contraction and the subsequent development of word-final ,’father‘ ָאב ē > *-ɛ̄. No unambiguous *quṭum nouns are attested. The irregular nouns-* father-in-law’ extend their stem with -i in the construct state and‘ ָחם brother’, and‘ ָאח ’brothers‘ ַאִחים before suffixes, originally a lengthened genitive case vowel. The plural goes back to *ʔaḫīma > *ʔaḫḫīma with pretonic gemination (Bergsträsser 1918, 139–149); his brothers’.4‘ ֶאָחיו < * ַאָחיו before å in the suffix, the a regularly assimilates to ɛ, as in 1 In this section, I will make frequent reference to the recent overview of Hebrew nominal morphology by Huehnergard (2015), where the reader will also find many references to the extensive literature on this subject. I have generally not indicated the many points on which we are in agreement. 2 Huehnergard (2015, 31) reconstructs the absolute state stem as *piy-, while Militarev and Kogan (2005, 195–197) reconstruct *pay- or *pVw-. According to the rules for triphthong con- although *piy- is , ֶפּה traction given in Chapter 5, all of these reconstructions would also yield incompatible with the Classical Arabic accusative fā (construct), not **fiya. 3 Many other scholars reconstruct a short *i or *u in these nouns, e.g. Huehnergard (2015, 30– 31). ַאַחד one (f.) (pause)’ but no change in‘ ֶא ָ֑חת < * ַא ָ֑חת ,’(one (m.) (absolute‘ ֶאָחד < * ַאָחד .Cf 4 lying‘ ֶכָּחִשׁים < * ַכָּחִשׁים ;’charcoal‘ ֶפָּחם < * ַפָּחם ;’(one (f.) (context‘ ַאַחת ,’(one (m.) (construct‘ ;’(the sword (pause‘ ֶה ָ֑חֶרב < * ַה ָ֑חֶרב ;’(he will comfort himself (pause‘ ִיְתֶנ ָ֑חם < * ִיְתַנ ָ֑חם ;’(.m.pl) etc. No sequences of aHå (with H representing any guttural) are retained. Benjamin D. Suchard - 9789004390263 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 07:59:23AM via free access a concise historical morphology of biblical hebrew 233 If the stress is farther removed from the first syllable, the original single *ḫ was pre- ֲאֵחיֶכם < brothers (construct)’ (Num 27:10), *ʔaḫaykimma‘ ֲאֵחי < served, as in *ʔaḫay ‘your (m.pl.) brothers’ (Hos 2:3).5 Nouns with *ī and *ū retain their original vowel, while those with *ā change it to *ō > o due to the Canaanite Shift. ֶ֫דֶּלת .Some feminine biradical nouns have incorporated a third radical in the plural ’maidservant‘ ָאָמה ; ְדָּלתוֹת door’ was reanalyzed as a segolate, giving rise to the plural‘ ָחמוֹת sister’ and‘ ָאחוֹת The feminine nouns . ֲאָמהוֹת ,has a third radical *h in the plural ‘mother-in-law’ were originally formed by adding the feminine suffix *-at- to their asso- ciated masculines; due to the pre-Proto-Semitic loss of their third radical, presumably *w, *-at- was lengthened to *-āt-, which became *-ōt- due to the Canaanite Shift. This parallels the lengthening of the case vowels still seen in the masculine construct states .(father-in-law’ (only attested before a suffix‘ * ֲחִמי brother’ and‘ ֲאִחי 2.2 *qVṭl(at)um (segolates) After the loss of the case endings, *qVṭlum nouns contained a word-final consonant cluster in the singular absolute state. In nouns from strong roots, this was resolved at a relatively late point in the history of Hebrew by the insertion of an epenthetic vowel, usually *ɛ, but *i after *y and usually *a after gutturals.6 If the third radical was -path’ (Bauer and Lean‘ ֹ֫אַרח < h, ḥ, or ʕ, *ɛ regularly assimilated to *a, as in *ʔórɛḥ ֶ֫חֶדר room’ (absolute‘ ֲחַדר der 1922, 569). In a few words, a separate construct state like is attested. With Steiner (1976), we may attribute this to early insertion of ( ֵ֫חֶדר and an epenthetic vowel before resonants; the further development of these forms, pre- sumably to be reconstructed like *ḥadr > *ḥader, is then like that of construct states of *qaṭilum nouns, discussed below. The plural forms of these segolates generally developed in the same way: in the abso- -with reduction of the first vowel and pretonic length , ְקָטִלים < lute state, *qVṭalīma7 ening of the second one. *quṭlum nouns seem to have preserved short *o in the first when secondarily accented, this vowel is ;( ֫גֶֹּרן .threshing floors’ (sg‘ ֳגָּרנוֹת syllable, as in In the construct state and before heavy .( ֫קֶֹדשׁ .holies’ (sg‘ ָֽקָדִשׁים lengthened to ɔ, as in 5 It thus appears that the gemination in the other forms of the plural is a (pre-)Hebrew-internal development, making the connection with Akkadian /aḫḫū/ ‘brothers’ more tenuous (pace Huehnergard 2015, 35). ֫בֶֹּהן bride-price’ (and also‘ ֹ֫מַהר tent’ and‘ ֹ֫אֶהל Based on cognate evidence, it seems likely that 6 ‘thumb/big toe’?) were originally *qaṭlum nouns (Huehnergard 2015, 40, n. 37). Similarly to head’, they would then have lost their *h with compensatory‘ רֹאשׁ < II-ʔ forms like *raʔsum lengthening of *a and a subsequent change to *ō under the Canaanite Shift, e.g. *ʔahl- > *ʔāl- > *ʔōl-. The consonantal h would then have been reintroduced based on the spelling, as may also have happened in some II-ʔ nouns (see below). 7 With the insertion of *a in the plural stem, possibly an Afroasiatic feature (cf. Greenberg 1955). Benjamin D. Suchard - 9789004390263 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 07:59:23AM via free access 234 appendix suffixes, *qVṭalay yielded *qəṭəlē. The first vowel developed to i or a, depending on the surrounding consonants and was frequently analogically influenced by the singular (see Chapter 7); *quṭlum again preserved ɔ. The second šwå was deleted, as it occurred in an open syllable. In the singular, we find different developments of the vowel in the first syllable. in context, with assimilation of *a to the epenthetic ֶ֫קֶטל qaṭlum regularly developed to* seed’ shows that‘ ֶ֫זַרע < ɛ. The development of words like *ḏarʕum > *zárɛʕ > *zɛ́rɛʕ* this assimilation took place before that of the second *ɛ to *a before gutturals. In major Before .ָ֑קֶטל pause, *a was lengthened to *ā, which did not assimilate, resulting in pausal suffixes, *a was largely preserved, but sometimes analogically replaced by *i due to influence from the *qiṭlum paradigm. *qiṭlum regularly merged with *qaṭlum in the context form of the absolute state due to Philippi and Blau’s Laws (see Chapter 6). Thus, the regular Biblical Hebrew -righteousness’. As Blau’s Law post‘ ֶ֫צֶדק < as in *tṣidqum , ֶ֫קֶטל outcome of *qiṭlum is Before suffixes, *i .ֶ֑קֶטל dated major pausal lengthening, the regular pausal form is also the , ֶ֫קֶטל < was regularly preserved. Since *qaṭlum and *qiṭlum partly merged in *qaṭl two paradigms exerted a large amount of analogical influence on each other, resulting his grave’ for regular‘ ִקְברוֹ milkahu,8* > ** ִמְלכּוֹ his king’ for regular‘ ַמְלכּוֹ in forms like -riglum. *e < *i was also fre* > **ֶ֑רֶגל foot’ for regular‘ ָ֑רֶגל qabrahu, and pausal* > ** ַקְברוֹ quently restored in the absolute state of *qiṭlum nouns, based on analogies like *kaspṓ ‘his silver’ : *kásp ‘silver’ = *ʕeglṓ ‘his calf’ : *ʕégl ‘calf’. These analogically restored *qeṭl . ֵ֫קֶטל nouns then developed into 2.2.1 Weak Roots In an early change, syllable-final *ʔ was lost, with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ב Bet ה Heh ו Vav ט Tet י Yod ך מ Mem ם
    Exercise 1A: Writing the Hebrew Square Script Using the examples at the right, practice writing out the Hebrew characters on the lines provided for you. Be sure to accurately reflect the position of the letter in relation to the base line. Boxes are used to indicate final forms. Letter Name aleph א aleph bet ב bet gimel ג gimel dalet ד dalet heh ה heh vav ו vav zayin ז zayin .het ח ḥet tet ט tet yod י kaph כ yod ך kaph final kaph lamed ל mem מ lamed ם mem 3 Exercise 1A: Writing tHe Hebrew SquAre Script final mem Letter Name nun נ ן nun final nun samek ס samek ayin ע pe פ ayin ף pe final pe tsade צ ץ tsade final tsade qoph ק qoph resh ר resh שׂ sin sin shin ׁש shin tav ת tav NAme: __________________________________________________ Exercise 1A: Writing tHe Hebrew SquAre Script 4 Exercise 1B: Reading Proper Names In this exercise you will practice identifying the Hebrew consonants by reading familiar proper names. Write the English name in the space to the left of the Hebrew name. Since the alphabet has no vowels, you will have to provide vowel sounds to recognize each word. Start by trying an “a” vowel between each con- sonant. The “a” vowel is the most common vowel in Hebrew and, while it will not always be the correct one, it should help you recognize these names. לבן Laban יעקב אסתר אברהם עבדיה יצחק יחזקאל יׂשראל דוד רבקה נחמיה נבכדנאזר ירבעם ירדן מרדכי מׁשה דברה גלית יׁשמעאל עׂשו 5 Exercise 1B: ReAding Proper NAmes Exercise 1C: Hebrew Cursive (Optional) Using the examples shown, practice writing out the cursive Hebrew characters on the lines provided for you.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tiberian Pronunciation Tradition of Biblical Hebrew, Volume I
    Cambridge Semitic Languages and Cultures The Tiberian Pronunciation Khan Tradition of Biblical Hebrew (Vol. I) The Tiberian Pronunciation Geoffrey Khan Tradition of Biblical Hebrew The form of Biblical Hebrew that is presented in printed edi� ons, with vocaliza� on and Tradition of Biblical Hebrew Vol. I accent signs, has its origin in medieval manuscripts of the Bible. The vocaliza� on and Volume I accent signs are nota� on systems that were created in Tiberias in the early Islamic period The Tiberian Pronunciation The by scholars known as the Tiberian Masoretes, but the oral tradi� on they represent has roots in an� quity. The gramma� cal textbooks and reference grammars of Biblical Hebrew in use today are heirs to centuries of tradi� on of gramma� cal works on Biblical Hebrew in GEOFFREY KHAN Europe. The paradox is that this European tradi� on of Biblical Hebrew grammar did not have direct access to the way the Tiberian Masoretes were pronouncing Biblical Hebrew. In the last few decades, research of manuscript sources from the medieval Middle East has made it possible to reconstruct with considerable accuracy the pronuncia� on of the Tiberian Masoretes, which has come to be known as the ‘Tiberian pronuncia� on tradi� on’. This book presents the current state of knowledge of the Tiberian pronuncia� on tradi� on of Biblical Hebrew and a full edi� on of one of the key medieval sources, Hidāyat al-Qāriʾ ‘The Guide for the Reader’, by ʾAbū al-Faraj Hārūn. It is hoped that the book will help to break the mould of current gramma� cal descrip� ons of Biblical Hebrew and form a bridge between modern tradi� ons of grammar and the school of the Masoretes of Tiberias.
    [Show full text]
  • HEADS HEBREW Graml\Iar
    HEADS OF HEBREW GRAMl\iAR HE1tDS OF IIEilRE\V GRAJ\ilJ\lAR CONTAINING ALL THE PRINCIPLES NEEDED BY A LEARNER. BY S. PRIDEAUX TREGELLES, LL.D. TWENTY-THIRD IMPRESSION SAMUEL BAGSTER & SONS LTD. 80 WIGMORE STREET LONDON WI NEW YORK: HARPER AND BROTHERS ..?'RINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN PREFACE. - THE object of these Heads of Hebrew Grammar is to furnish the learner of that language with all that is noedful for him in his introductory studies, so that he may be thoroughly grounded in all that is elementary. In teaching, the present writer has been wont to give oral imtruction as to all the elements, commonly making use of some short Hebrew grammar ;--marking tl,e rules which re­ quire attent10n, and adding others which are not to be found in elementary grammars in general. In this way he has had a kind of oral Hebrew grammar for learners; and the same grammatical instruction which he has thus communicated to those whom he has thus taught, is here given w-ritten down for use or reference. He is well aware that the number of Hebrew grammars,­ both of those called elementary, and of those called critical, -is very great; this consideration made him long feel reluc­ tant to commit his oral grammatical instruction to writing; but, if the mass of He\Jrew grammars be examined, it will be found that very few of them possess any distinctive features; and he is not aware of one which he has been able to use as thoroughly adapted to the want,s of learners.
    [Show full text]
  • Hebrew Language
    A HISTOI'{Y OF TFIE HEBREW LANGUAGE ANGEL SAENZ-BADILLOS Translated by IOHN ELWOLDE Department of BtuIical Sludies' Uniaer s i t y of Shellizl d CavrnRrDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Acknozaledgements progressed and prepared a prelirninary version of the Index, and Chapter F{EBREW {I{ T E CCb{TEXT OF THE SEMITIC I-ANGT-TAGES '1.1 ASB Flehrezu, a Semitic language Madrid F{ebrew is a Semitic dialect or tranguage which developed in the northvsestern part of the Near East between the River jordan and the Mediterranean Sea during the latter half of tl'te second milienniurn tsCE. The country cornprising this area was known as Canaan, a nan'ne that is aiso associated witl'l the language in its earLiest written sources: Jllp nDq 6"p^! kena'an) 'the language of Canaan' (Xs 19:18). Eisewhere, the language is called n'Tln1 (ye-lru{i!) 'judaean, Judahite' (2Kn8:26,28, etc.). In the Hellenistic period, writers refer to it by the Greek terwv Hebraios, Hebrar'sti (Josephus, Antiquities tr, 1:2 etc.),1 and under the Rornan Ernpire it was known as fillJJ ('ibrr!) 'F{ebrew' or (f"l)'lJ$ litU! (la6on 'ibri[!l) 'Hebrew language' (Mishnah, Gittin 9:8, etc.), terms that recalled Eber (Gn 77:14), ancestor of the people that would become known,like Abraharn (Gn 74:73), by the narne'Flebrew'.2 Frorn a cultural perspective, this language was to ptray an extremely important r6le, not only in the history of the peoptre rvkro spoke it, but also wifhin Western culture in general. It was fo be 1 .l) How"u"r, C.H.
    [Show full text]
  • Beginning Biblical Hebrew
    Beginning Biblical Hebrew Beginning Biblical Hebrew Mark D. Futato Winona Lake, Indiana Eisenbrauns 2003 ç Copyright 2003 by Mark D. Futato. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Futato, Mark David Beginning Biblical Hebrew / Mark D. Futato. p. cm. ISBN 1-57506-022-1 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Hebrew language—Grammar. I. Title. PJ4567.3.F88 2003 492.4u82421—dc21 2003054970 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. †‘ 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 To my wife, Adele Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all. (Proverbs 31:30 [29]) Wnl: alø hw;hy] Wnl: alø d/bK: ˆTE Úm}v¥l}AyKI ÚT<mIa“Al[" ÚD]s}j"Al[" (Psalm 115:1) CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . xi 1. THE ALPHABET . 1 2. THE VOWELS . 7 3. SYLLABLES, SHEVA, AND STRONG DAGESH . 13 4. THE NOUN: BASIC FORMS . 18 5. PRONOUNS AND THE DEFINITE ARTICLE . 24 6. THE VERB: QAL PERFECT . 29 7. SENTENCES WITH VERBS . 36 8. THE NOUN: VOWEL CHANGES . 42 9. PREPOSITIONS AND VAV CONJUNCTION . 49 10. THE ADJECTIVE . 56 11. THE VERB: QAL IMPERFECT . 63 12. CONSTRUCT RELATIONSHIP: SINGULAR . 68 13. CONSTRUCT RELATIONSHIP: PLURAL . 75 14. QAL PERFECT AND IMPERFECT: WEAK ROOTS . 81 15. QAL PERFECT AND IMPERFECT: I NUN AND III HEY .
    [Show full text]
  • Phonemic Conversion As the Ideal Romanization Scheme for Hebrew
    Judaica Librarianship Volume 19 43-72 4-26-2016 Phonemic Conversion as the Ideal Romanization Scheme for Hebrew: Implications for Hebrew Cataloging Uzzi Ornan Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Technion—Israel Institute of Technology, [email protected] Rachel Leket-Mor Arizona State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://ajlpublishing.org/jl Part of the Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons, Computational Linguistics Commons, Information Literacy Commons, Jewish Studies Commons, and the Reading and Language Commons Recommended Citation Ornan, Uzzi & Rachel Leket-Mor. 2016. "Phonemic Conversion as the Ideal Romanization Scheme for Hebrew: Implications for Hebrew Cataloging." Judaica Librarianship 19: 43-72. doi:10.14263/2330-2976.1169. Phonemic Conversion as the Ideal Romanization Scheme for Hebrew: Implications for Hebrew Cataloging Author Biography & Related Information Uzzi Ornan (born 1923) is a professor of Hebrew linguistics and natural language processing at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Technion—Israel Institute of Technology, and a member of the Academy of the Hebrew Language. In 1944, Ornan was detained in a British detention camp in Eritrea, where he taught Hebrew grammar to his fellow detainees from Erets Israel. In 1947, still in the camp, he published his Grammar of Mouth and Ear. After the detainees were freed in 1948 the book was reprinted in abridged edition several times in Israel. In 2016, Ornan completed a thoroughly revised edition of the book, compatible with current progress of linguistics (Jerusalem: The eH brew University Magnes Press). Associated with the Canaanite movement, Ornan established the League against Religious Coercion (1950) and has been active in the separation of church and state movement in Israel ever since.
    [Show full text]
  • Heads of Hebrew Grammar
    H ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Brittle Books Project, 2012. COPYRIGHT NOTIFICATION In Public Domain. Published prior to 1923. This digital copy was made from the printed version held by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. It was made in compliance with copyright law. Prepared for the Brittle Books Project, Main Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign by Northern Micrographics Brookhaven Bindery La Crosse, Wisconsin 2012 rr rlr --aT THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY T9\k iSi"2 ~ :i~nt" j ~s~P." uiye r) ~e~s R~: ' 4 A '4" iLBil'* *I xtD'~ :4~ n 4 y- t j- • . e¢, s SAMUEL BAGSTER AND SONS, 15, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, Issue GRATUITOUSLY, AND SEND FREE BY POST, Catalogues of their tfarious Bibles in different languages, for pocket, study, or family use; also of the New Testa- ment, and Book of Common Prayer, as well as Concordances and Lexicons Grammars,Psalters, and Biblical Works in great variety. SELECTIONS FROM THE CATALOGUE. THE ANALYTICAL HEBREW AND CHALDEE LEXICON; THE WORDS OF THE ENTIRE HEBREW SCRIPTURES ARRANGED JUST AS THEY ARE FOUND IN THE SACRED TEXT, ALPHABETICALLY, AND ARE GRAMMATICALLY EXPLAINED. The ANALYTICAL LEXICON is- I. A Lexicon in the ordinary sense of supplying the various meanings of the roots. II. A Dictionary of every derivative and modification of every root, in alpha- betical order, with analysis. III. A storehouse of the anomalies of the language, carefully arranged, and referred to from all parts of the work. IV. A Concordance of the least easily understood words.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Hebrew Linguistics (‘Inleiding Hebreeuwse Taalkunde’) Uva, Weeks 10-11
    Introduction to Hebrew Linguistics (‘Inleiding Hebreeuwse Taalkunde’) UvA, Weeks 10-11 Morphology Tamás Biró 1 Morphology • Morphology: studies the inner structure of words. Well, what is a word? •Word: No general definition – Syntactic word: basic unit of a sentence. – Phonological word: domain of some phonological processes (e.g., stress assignment, vowel harmony). – Orthographic word: between two spaces. – Clitic: part of the phonological word, but syntactically an independent unit (e.g., articles, French preverbal pronouns, etc.). 2 Example: Kaleb-letters ?כ ,ל ,ב What is the status of Hebrew prepositions • • Orthography: single word. Not a linguistic argument. • Syntax: preposition is an autonomous unit. Merges with article (be+ha = ba), similarly to French du, German vom. • Phonology: – Take a phenomenon that depends on word beginning: begat-kefat allophony: [stop] → [fricative] / V__ .[Tiberian H [bevayit], colloquial Israeli H [bebayit :בבית – – > TH/BH: clitic + word = single phonological word. – > Colloquial IH: two phonological words, and begad- kefat rule does not apply across word boundary. – [bevakaša]: lexicalized unit: diachronically complex, but synchronically in IH monomorphemic. 3 Morphology • Morphology: studies the inner structure of words. Well, what is a word? No general definition Morpheme: Smallest linguistic unit with meaning. (Well, what is meaning?) Free morphemes: can stand alone. Bound morphemes: affixes and “cranberry”-morphemes. Null morpheme: no phonemic material (e.g., Sg. masc.) Allomorph: alternative forms of the same morpheme. • Morphology: studies the way morphemes are combined. – Morpho-phonology: sound changes during morpheme combination (e.g., 't kofschip, V harmony). – Morpho-syntax: morpheme combinations in order to enter a sentence (e.g. cases, agreement). 4 Morphological processes Inflection: feminine, plural, construct, binyanim, mishkalim..
    [Show full text]
  • Sound Changes in the (Pre-)Masoretic Reading Tradition and the Original Pronunciation of Biblical Aramaic
    SOUND CHANGES IN THE (PRE-)MASORETIC READING TRADITION AND THE ORIGINAL PRONUNCIATION OF BIBLICAL ARAMAIC Benjamin D. Suchard Leiden University For nearly a thousand years, the texts of the Hebrew Bible were transmitted both in writing, as consonantal texts lacking much of the information about their pronunciation, and orally, as an accompanying reading tradition which supplied this information. During this period of oral trans- mission, sound changes affected the reading tradition. This paper identifies a number of sound changes that took place in the reading tradition by comparing their effects on Biblical Hebrew to those on Biblical Aramaic, the related but distinct language of a small part of the biblical corpus. Sound changes that affect both languages equally probably took place in the reading tradition, while those that are limited to one language probably preceded this shared oral transmission. Drawing this distinction allows us to reconstruct the pronunciation of Biblical Aramaic as it was fixed in the reading tradition, highlighting several morphological discrepancies between the dialect underlying it and that of the consonantal texts. 1. INTRODUCTION The Biblical Aramaic corpus as it has reached us, like the rest of the Hebrew Bible, is a hybrid.1 The texts were originally composed in the second half of the first millennium BCE (Gzella 2011: 583). Due to the largely consonantal nature of the script, however, much of the phonetic information needed to actually pronounce even a single word was missing from these texts. Readers either had to supply this missing information based on their knowledge of the language – as modern- day readers of (unvocalized) Hebrew or Arabic do without too much trouble – or had to rely on an orally transmitted reading tradition, which allowed them to memorize the pronunciation of each verse and in that way compensate for the orthography’s deficiencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Intermediate Biblical Hebrew Grammar
    INTERMEDIATE BIBLICAL HEBREW GRAMMAR Press SBL R ESOURCES FOR BIBLICAL STUDY Editor Marvin A. Sweeney, Old Testament/Hebrew Bible Number 89 Press SBL INTERMEDIATE BIBLICAL HEBREW GRAMMAR A Student’s Guide to Phonology and Morphology E ric D. Reymond Press SBL Atlanta C opyright © 2018 by E ric D. Reymond A ll rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permit- ted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Office,S BL Press, 825 Hous- ton Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Reymond, Eric D., author. Title: Intermediate biblical Hebrew grammar : a student’s guide to phonology and mor- phology / by Eric D. Reymond. Description: Atlanta : SBL Press, [2017] | Series: Resources for biblical study ; number 89 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers:LCCN 2017037103 (print) | LCCN 2017037346 (ebook) | ISBN 9780884142492 (ebook) | ISBN 9781628371895 (pbk. : alk. paper) | ISBN 9780884142508 (hardcover : alk. paper) Subjects: Hebrew language—Phonology. | Hebrew language—Morphology. Classification: LCC PJ4576 (ebook) | LCC PJ4576 .R49 2017 (print) | DDC 492.45/9— dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017037103 Press Printed on acid-free paper. SBL T o Robin, Lucy, and Oliver ἀρχὴ γὰρ αὐτῆς ἡ ἀληθεστάτη παιδείας ἐπιθυμία “The beginning of wisdom is open yearning for instruction” (Wis 6:17).
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Hebrew Stress Phonology and Phonetics
    Brill’s Journal of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 11 (2019) 96–118 brill.com/aall Modern Hebrew stress Phonology and phonetics Outi Bat-El Tel-Aviv University [email protected] Evan-Gary Cohen Tel-Aviv University [email protected] Vered Silber-Varod The Open University [email protected] Abstract The paper provides a comprehensive description of the phonology and phonetics of Hebrew stress. The distribution of the stress patterns draws a categorial distinc- tion between verbs and nouns, and enhances the typologically uncommon disparity between the most common pattern (final stress) and the default pattern (penultimate stress). As the acoustic studies reveal, the main cue for Hebrew stress is duration, though the duration contrast is eliminated between a phrase final unstressed syllable and the preceding stressed syllable. A second important result of the acoustic studies is that there is no evidence for secondary stress. Keywords Hebrew stress – default stress – acoustic cues 1 Introduction Hebrew primary stress resides within the trisyllabic window, i.e. on one of the right-most three syllables in the word, with final stress being the most com- © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/18776930-01101008 modern hebrew stress 97 mon pattern (Bolozky 1982, Bat-El 1989, 1993, 2018, Graf 1999, Becker 2002, Graf and Ussishkin 2002, Cohen 2010, Pariente and Bolozky 2014, Cohen and Ussishkin 2013). Secondary stress has been claimed to reside on every other syl- lable away from the main stress (Bolozky 1982, Kadmon 1986, Bat-El 1993, Graf and Ussishkin 2002, Cohen and Ussishkin, 2013, Bolozky 2015), but this claim is not acoustically supported (Becker 2002, Bolozky 2015, Cohen et al.
    [Show full text]
  • ON PAUSAL LENGTHENING, PAUSAL STRESS SHIFT, Philippl's LAW and RULE ORDERING in BIBLICAL HEBREW1
    ON PAUSAL LENGTHENING, PAUSAL STRESS SHIFT, PHILIPPl'S LAW AND RULE ORDERING IN BIBLICAL HEBREW1 By JOSHUA BLAU Hebrew University of Jerusalem ABSTRACT: Philippi's Law operated much later than generally assumed. It was preceded by: I. Pausal lengthening; and 2. Pausal stress shift to the last syllable. Therefore, pata~ that arose through Philippi's Law from i did not change through pausal lengthening to qama~. For example, pausal *wayyllik, which through pausal stress shift became *wayyilik, ultimately became wayyelak with final pata~ rather than qama~, because pausal length­ ening had ceased operating. Similarly, *milk, shifting through Philippi's Law to *malk, did not change to *malk (>*ma/elf), but remained *malk (>mele!~). because pausal lengthening had ceased operating. I. The strict application of sound shifts and rigorous rule ordering is apt to clarify the conditions of phonetic behavior, which, prima facie, seems to be without any conditioning. Since, however, the regular behavior of sound shifts is affected by analogy, the results obtained are sometimes rather intricate. l. l. Our starting point for the understanding of biblical phonology is the assumption that, in biblical Hebrew, general penult stress once pre­ vailed. 2 This theory, in my opinion, is the most powerful explanation avail- I I would like to thank my friend Professor Richard Steiner, who, acting as moderator of a symposium on stress in biblical Hebrew at Yeshiva University, New York, in December 1979, asked me about pausal wayye/ak as against the context form wayy~lek, and so initiated this paper. I am grateful to him also for his sympathetic attitude during later stages.
    [Show full text]