SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL

David Toshio TSUMURA*

The Masoretic text (MT) of the books of Samuel has often been treated as corrupt, and various emendations have been suggested based on the Greek translation (LXX).1 However, many seemingly corrupt words or phrases can be explained as linguistic variants. In 1999, I argued that these variants are often orthographic representations of the actual pronunciation, i.e. phonetic spellings, and indicate the aural nature of the books of Samuel.2

For example, wattazreni "and you girded me" (2 Sam. 22:40) is not a textual corruption of the normal watt•Ý azz•Ýreni, which is preserved in Ps. 18:40, but rather a phonetic spelling of the spoken form resulting from a vowel sandhi3 after the loss of an intervocalic . Thus,

watt•Ýazza•Ýreni •¨ watt•Ýazz•Ýreni •¨ wattazreni. Such aural features are characteristic of a narrative, while a formal, liturgical text such as Ps. 18 requires grammatically normal forms. It is possible that 2 Sam. 22 preserves "a number of archaic readings" which reflect "a text written in the dialect of Israel, the Northern Kingdom".4 To be sure, the defective spellings (without w) for the diphthong aw, which reflect a northern dialect, suggest that 2 Sam. 22 possibly originated or experienced a recension in the north.5 However, it is important to distinguish various types of linguistic variants. While some peculiar spellings may indeed be dialectal, one should remember that in some cases, colloquialism or the aural nature of narrative or the archaic nature of poetic texts are involved rather than foreign, dialectal features. In this lecture I would like to survey linguistic variants in the books of Samuel, especially 1 Samuel. Before we go on further, let us take an overview of the structure of 1 Samuel. The First Book of Samuel is composed of three major stories, i.e. the "Story of Samuel" (1:1 -7:17) , the "Story of Saul" (9:1-15:35) and the "Story of Saul and David" (16:1-31:13), plus a transitional section on the introduction of

* Professor of Old Testament , Japan Bible Seminary

36 ORIENT SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL the monarchy (ch. 8). Each story consists of a number of episodes, selected and arranged according to the themes and purposes of the story. Individual sections were probably composed on different occasions and originated from various backgrounds, yet the transition from one section to another and from one episode to another is well planned. Consequently the entire narrative has a cohesive literary unity.6 It has been argued that the language of a book such as Hosea has northern characteristics because it was probably written in the north by a northerner for the northerners.7 Recently, G. A. Rendsburg argued that the language of 1 Samuel 1-2 also reflects northern features. "The heroes are from the territory of Ephraim, and the action centers on Shiloh in Ephraim, so it would not be surprising to find these chapters composed in the northern dialect of ancient Hebrew."8 Certainly, it is reasonable to assume that the documents whose content suggests a northern origin or which are written from a northern perspective are written in northern dialects or reflect the language of the north. On the other hand, it has been claimed that some passages, even some whole Biblical books and psalms, are of northern origin in the light of variants which display seemingly northern dialectal characteristics. For example, it is argued, the prophet Amos must have come from the northern, not the Judean, Tekoa because the language of the book of Amos sometimes exhibits northern characteristics. However, one should note that the sporadic existence of northern features would not necessarily make that document to be of northern origin. As for Psalm 29, which is often taken as having been originally a Canaanite hymn to Baa1,9 Rendsburg asserts it to be an "Israelian Hebrew" (IH)10 psalm." lists beneelim (v. 1) "the sons of gods" (G-III-312) and lammabbeul (v. 10) "to the flood" as northern variants, since these forms also appear in and Phoenician (G-II-D1). However, an argument based on Ugaritic vocabulary is not conclusive since most of the Ugaritic cognates are from epic or mythological texts, in which many idiomatic and archaic expressions are preserved.13 In fact, the phrases bn ilm "sons of gods" (KTU 1.4:111:14) and bn it "sons of god/El" (1.40:2) refer to deities in the Ugaritic religio-mythological texts. The expression lammabbul, which etymologically has no connection with Ugaritic mdb, is idiomatically closer to the Akkadian expression lam abubi and probably means "from before the Deluge".14 So, for an expression to be literarily "Canaanite" or to have affinities with Ugaritic mythology does not make it necessarily "Israelian".

The "Last words of David" in 2 Sam. 23:1-7 is also said to be of northern origin, based on the linguistic evidence.15 For example, the term n•Ýum

Vol. XXXVIII 2003 37 "utterance" in a human context and DN al "the High God" (see REB) in v. 1 are, according to Rendsburg, northern dialectal words. However, strictly speaking, this initial verse is not a part of the song itself but an introductory comment by the editor or narrator in the south. Moreover, the preservation of the old *kwn, "to be" (cf. Arabic), in v. 5 and the longer form kullaham "all of them" in v. 6 may be due to the song's archaic nature. Furthermore, the phrase dibber-bi (v. 2) probably means "to speak through" (see Num. 12:2, 1 Ki. 22:28, Hab. 2:1, 2 Chr. 18:27), rather than "to speak to", and so has nothing directly to do with northernisms. Therefore, none of these three expressions are necessarily IH. The last example, millato "his word", is certainly a northern Israelian feature with an affinity. However, this example alone does not mean the song originated in the northern territory, as is also the case with Ps. 2, which has the noun bar (v. 12), an Aramaic form for "son", besides the normal noun ben (v. 7). In any linguistic study, it is an axiom that the linguistic features of a text should be observed and analyzed synchronically first and only then should one move on to diachronic investigation. On the other hand, any synchronic irregularity in a given text might indicate historical, or diachronic, aspects of that language, for rare and unusual forms are evidence of the "survival" of the older forms and hence point to the results of linguistic change.16 They are particularly attested in poetic texts, which usually preserve archaic expressions, and in peripheral dialects, which are often linguistically conservative. In the following, I would like to examine "rare and unusual" grammatical and lexical items mainly in the First Book of Samuel, without going into the problem of literary origin, to see whether they are dialectal variants which can be identified as Israelian Hebrew' (IH) or are archaic forms which are preserved in the poetic texts.

I. Phonology A. Consonants areka (1 Sam. 28:16) "your enemy" (Samuel to Saul) G-I-A3

This unusual form for "enemy", with v rather than is, in the speech of Samuel through the 'witch' of Endor, probably reflects IH, as in Aramaic, where Proto-Semitic /d/ had shifted to / /.

B. Vowels C. Diphthongs

an (1 Sam. 10:14) "where?" (Saul's uncle) ay •¨ a G-I-C2

38 ORIENT SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL

Rendsburg takes this monophthongization as an example of IH, since this

phenomenon is attested in "Syrian Semitic and Arabic dialects of Lebanon, Syria, and northern Israel to this day". It seems this has been a northern Semitic feature since the 3rd millennium B.C. as in Eblaite and Amorite.

As for abigal (1 Sam. 25:32, 2 Sam. 3:3 (K.), 17:25) "Abigal", however,

ai •¨ a is due to a phonological adjustment at the boundary between two

vowels, i.e. vowel sandhi,

a bigayil •¨ abigail •¨ abigal

rather than the monophthongization of diphthong ai to a.17

Cf. abigayil (25:3, etc.)

in (1 Sam. 21:9) "there is not" (David to Ahimelech of Nob)

•¨ in

In this example, the monophthongization ay •¨ i occurs. Is this a

Bethlehemite dialect spoken by David? See Akkadian bitu •© *baytu.

II. Morphology A. Pronouns kullaham (2 Sam. 23:6) "all of them" (David) G-II-A4

While it is not impossible that this form is IH in the light of Aramaic, as Rendsburg holds, the preservation of /h/ could also be due to poetic archaism. The fact that this is the only attestation in the Bible and that the standard form kullam appears even in Ps. 139:16, the psalm which Rendsburg takes as IH (see G-I-A3), rather supports the latter possibility.

mah lameh (1 Sam. 1:8 x3) "why?" (Elkanah of Ephraim) G-II-A9 meh qo1(1 Sam. 4:6) "what (is) sound?" (Philistine) G-II-A9 meh qo1(1 Sam. 4:14) "what (is) sound?" (Eli, of Shiloh) G-II-A9 meh qo1(1 Sam. 15:14) "what (is) sound?" (Samuel) G-II-A9 bammeh (1 Sam. 6:2) "with what?" (Philistine) G-II-A9 ubammeh (1 Sam. 29:4) "with what?" (Philistine) G-II-A9

Rendsburg notes that among the 36 attestations of the interrogative pronoun meh before non-laryngeal consonants, 23 (64%) of them appear

Vol. XXXVIII 2003 39 in a non-Judahite context, hence he concludes meh is IH. However, since this form often coexists in the same context as mah or mall (see the Philistine speeches in 1 Sam. 6:2 & 4 and 29:3-4), its attestation itself does not prove that the text was written in the north.

The form meh is attested also before the laryngeal h, though usually mah or mah appears in such an environment (e.g. bammah hayetah in Saul's speech in 1 Sam. 14:38); for example,

meh-hayah (1 Sam. 4:16; 2 Sam. 1:4) "what?" (Eli, of Shiloh; David) also Ex. 32:1, 23, Eccl. 7:10, Lam. 5:1 Also, meh h- in Eccl. 2:12, 22.

The cases of meh before 01 "voice, sound" in 1 Sam. 4:6, 14 and 15:14 might be due to their phonological environment, similar to the cases of meh which is expected before. In fact, the emphatic velar consonant /q/ shifted to the pharyngal // in Old Aramaic. If so, the form meh before qol has nothing to do with the "northernism". The same phenomenon is attested in Mal. 3:8, where bammeh appears before qeba anuka.

On the other hand, the form mah appears before when meh would be normally expected in the standard Hebrew in Gen. 31:32 (mah immadi "what is with me?") in Jacob's speech to his Aramaean father -in-law and in 2 Ki. 8:13 (mah abdakii "what is your servant?") in the speech by Hazael, an Aramaean. Here, the form mah seems to be a "northern" dialect as in the Aramaic texts in Dan. 4:32 [ET 35] (mah 'abadt).

Similarly, the form mah appears before h in Gen. 31:36 (mah hatta'ti "what is my sin?") and Job 21:21 (mah -hepso "what is his delight?") , though meh is normally expected in standard Hebrew. Those forms, with virtual doubling of the consonant /h/, could also be "northernisms" in the light of Ezra 6:9 (mah hashan "what is needed").

In the light of the above, to hold that the form meh before non-laryngeal consonants is a characteristically northern feature is not without difficulty. Statistical "evidence", especially only a 2:1 ratio, cannot be a good basis for identifying dialectical variants in the "".

40 ORIENT SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL B. Nouns mera asoto (1 Sam. 26:7, 11 [David], 12, 16 [David]) "at the head"

The fem. sg. nominal ending -lit is probably a feature of IH, as in Phoenician; see G-II-B2.

el deot (1 Sam. 2:3) "a God of knowledge" (NRSV)

The term deot for "knowledge" might be singular, though with the ending -ot, and hence IH.

qetilah formation happesirdh (1 Sam. 13:21) "payment" (?) Benjaminite? G-II-B4

hahesi (1 Sam. 20:36, 37) "the arrow": variant hesi (about Jonathan) This by-form of hes (*bss) "arrow" appears only here and in 2 Ki. 9:24 (ab. Jehu). Arabic, Ethiopic18 and Mandaean19 cognates point to the root *hsy . Both may go back to the original bi-consonantal Proto-Semitic root *hs.

C. Verbs kalu,1(1 Sam. 6:10) "they shut up" (*k) This is an example of a phonetic spelling, resulting from vowel sandhi after the loss of an intervocalic aleph.20 Thus, kaleu•¨kaleu•¨ kalu It probably has nothing to do with an IH dialect; it reflects the aural feature of the books of Samuel as narrative.21

yehosia (1 Sam. 17:47) "he saves": -h- Hi. vb. (David) G-II-C4 This example of "non-elision of he in Hiphil verb", as in Aramaic, could be due to an archaism in David's Bethlehemite (?) dialect rather than IH.

satoh (1 Sam. 1:9) "to drink": Inf.cstr. not ot (at Shiloh) G-II-C9 leheraoh (1 Sam. 3:21) "to appear": Ni. inf. cstr (at Shiloh) G-II-C9 As Rendsburg thinks, these inf. cstr. of III-h verbs are possibly IH, as in Ugaritic.

wattaboti "and you had come" (1 Sam. 25:34) impf-ti: a dialectal form? or simply an error.

Vol. XXXVIII 2003 41 This verbal form (imperfect) is unusual with the suffix -ti, an "enclitic particle" known from Amorite/Amarna Akk. Texts(?).22 lalat (1 Sam. 4:19) "to give birth" (at Shiloh)

The form, le+inf.cstr., experienced the following changes:

la-ladt- •„ lalatt- •„la-lat cf. Ugaritic ylt23

D. Particles ad (1 Sam. 14:19) "while" (ab. Saul) as in Aramaic G-II-D5

non-elision of h lehaqqardummim (1 Sam. 13:21) "for the axes" (in Benjamin) G-II-D9 Rendsburg takes this example of "non-elision of the definite article he after uniconsonantal prepositions b-, l-, k-, as in Punic" to be an IH feature. However, this could be an archaism for a technichal term rather than an IH phenomenon.

kehayyom (1 Sam. 9:13) "about this time" (girls at Ramah) The form kehayyom appears only here in Samuel; it usually experiences vowel sandhi after the elision of the inter-vocalic [h] and changes to kayyom. Does this unusual and full form suggest the formality of the girls' attitude toward the strangers rather than being an IH feature? Cf. kayyom (only in 1 Sam.) 2:16, 9:27, 18:10, 22:8, 13.

Other examples of "non-elision of h" after the preposition l- are as follows: leharapah (2 Sam. 21:20, 22) "to the giants/Rapha" lehallehem (2 Sam. 16:2 [K.]) "as for the bread" (Ziba)

'is (2 Sam. 14:19) "there is" (woman from Tekoa) G-II-D12 This is a particle of existence, as in Ugaritic and Aramaic. Since the interchange between the first word and the first y word is not uncommon before /i/ even in the same context (e.g. Keret epic, KTU 1.14:1:8, IV:21), one need not to classify it as IH.

locative -h nobeh (1 Sam. 21:2, 22:9 [Doeg the Edomite]) "to, at Nob"

42 ORIENT SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL This is the only example of the locative suffix -eh, rather than -ah. The only other examples are in 1 Ki. 2:36 (aneh), 42 (aneh), Ezek.25:13 (dedaneh). The last example may also suggest an Edomite connection.

III. Syntax indef. art. G-III-4 ehad (1 Sam. 1:1?, 7:9) "a" (ab. Elkanah, ab. Samuel) ehat (1 Sam. 6:7, 7:12) "a" (ab. Philistine, ab. Samuel) Rendsburg notes the use of the numeral "one" as an indefinite article, as in Aramaic and MH, in these passages. The same can be said for ehad (1 Sam. 22:20, 26:20, 27:1, 2 Sam. 18:10 [G-III-4]), though the one in 1 Sam. 1:1 still poses a difficulty in syntax.24

inf. abs. as narrative: bahor (1 Sam. 2:28) G-III-7 saol "to ask , inquire" (1 Sam. 22:13) (Saul) "pre-Exilic JH" G-III-7 hosea "to deliver, save" (1 Sam. 25:26) (Abigail) "pre-Exilic JH"G-III-7 The use of the infinitive absolute as a "narrative tense, as in Byblos Amarna, Ugaritic, and Phoenician" has been recently surveyed by J. Ikeda for the Books of Kings.25

al + noun: al (2 Sam. 1:21) x2 (David) G-III-15 "0 mountains of Gilboa , may you have neither dew nor rain, nor fields that yield offerings [of grain]. For there the shield of the mighty was defiled, the shield of Saul-no longer rubbed with oil." (NIV) The negative particle al is sometimes followed by a noun, as in Deir Rendsburg sees IH features in the elegy of 2 Sam. 1:21, whichAlla is ascribed to David but has the northern setting of Gilboa. However, this could be also an archaic feature of poetry.

dibber-bi (2 Sam. 23:2) "speak to" ? (David) R (1988)26 While Rendsburg holds that the phrase means "to speak to" and has northern characteristics, it most naturally means "to speak through", taking the preposition b- as instrumental "by, with" (so HALOT, 105).27

fem. "sun" (2 Sam. 12:11)-Gen 15:17, Ex. 22:2, Deut. 24:15, Ps. 104:22, Eccl. 12:2, Isa. 38:8, Jer. 15:9, Jon. 4:8, Mal. 3:20

Vol. XXXVIII 2003 43 In Biblical Hebrew the "sun" is usually masculine in gender. However, a number of Biblical passages treat the term semes as feminine. This is probably a northern characteristic, as in Ugaritic, and is typical of idiomatic expressions such as tered meod in 1 Sam. 20:19 (by Jonathan), which might be translated as "after dark" (lit."let her (= the sun) go down well", namely "wait until it gets dark"). Note that the feminine sun is probably intended in the phrase baalat a "Lady of the spirits of the dead" in 1 Sam. 28:7 (Saul).28

IV. Lexicon A. Nouns and Adjectives chid (1 Sam. 2:14?) "pot, basket" (in Ephraim) L-I-1229

millato (2 Sam. 23:2) "word" (Aramaic) (David) L-I-42 mamlekut (1 Sam. 15:28) "kingdom" (Samuel) L-I-43 2 Sam. 16:3 (Ziba [of Benjamin]?) L-I-43 neum (2 Sam. 23:1) "oracle" in a human context L-I-46 Using this term for human speakers is IH, according to Rendsburg, though it could be another archaism in Biblical Hebrew.

naim (2 Sam. 23:1) "favorite"/"singer" L-I-48 naim (2 Sam. 1:23) (by David, at Gilboa) "Saul and Jonathan in life they- were loved and gracious, and in death they were not parted. They were swifter than eagles, they were stronger than lions. " (NIV) naamtii (2 Sam. 1:26) "you were very dear to me" (NIV)

While nm is an ordinary term for "good" in Ugaritic, it appears as a technical term in Hebrew for describing heroes or singers. Such usages are archaic in Hebrew, not necessarily northern dialectal.

alo[alaw](1 Sam. 2:10) DN Hannah R (1988) (2 Sam. 23:1) DN R al(1988)

Rendsburg takes these examples as IH, but they may be simply archaisms in the poetic texts.

44 ORIENT SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL

qerdb (2 Sam. 17:11) "battle, war" (Hushai) Aramaic loan word.

lyimor lehem (1 Sam. 16:20) calque : Akk. imeru This is an archaic expression for measurement. It is most likely a calque of the Akkadian measurement term imeru "ass-load", a unit for 120-200 lit.30

B. Verbs azal (1 Sam. 9:7) "go" (Saul, at Ephraim); cf. . L-II-2 nikkar (1 Sam. 23:7) Pi. "obtain, acquire" (Saul) L-II-40

ken (2 Sam. 23:5) "to be" (David) Com Sem Rendsburg thinks that this is another example of IH dialect. However, it is a Common Semitic term, as in Arabic, which uses kana as an existential "to be" . Such an archaic usage can be preserved in old poetic texts like 2 Sam. 23:2-7.

wayyaap (1 Sam. 14:28, 31) "become tired" (in Ephraim) *yp MHeb , 1QHod, JArm, Syr. (HALOT, 820) 2 Sam. 21:15, Jer. 4:31, Jud. 4:21 This verb might be an IH, as in Aramaic and MishHeb.

C. Particles al (1 Sam. 27:10) "where?" (Achish) = n? cf. Akk. ali (where?) CAD, A/1, 338f. This particle could be a dialectical term, used by the Philistine Achish, which has a linguistic connection with Akkadian ali.

oy (1 Sam. 4:7 & 8) "woe, oh" (Philistine)

- also Num . 21:29, 24:23 & Isa., Jer., Ezek. & Hos. Prov. 23:29. cf. hoy - 1 Ki. 13:30, Isa., Jer., Ezek. Amos, Mic., Nah., Hab., Zeph., Zech. This is also spoken by the Philistines, the Moabite Balam and probably the northern Israelites.

Vol. XXXVIII 2003 45 Appendix: Biblical Order 1 Samuel 1:1? eha d "a" (indef . art.) G-III-4 "why" (Elkanah) 1:8 lameh G-II-A9 "why" (Elkanah) 1:8 lameh G-II-A9 1:8 lameh "why" (Elkanah) G-II-A9 1:9 Satoh Inf.cstr. (Shiloh) G-II-C9 2:3 el deot "a God of knowledge" (NRSV) 2:10 alo [alaw] DN R (1988) 119 "by Hannah of the tribe of Ephraim" "pot 2:14? dud , basket" (Ephraim)? L-I-12

2:22 yaasun 3mp. w. paragogic - only in Ex . 18:20, 1 Ki. 19:2, 20:10, Hos. 9:16

2:22 yiskebun - only in Jos. 2:8, Job 30:17 2:28 bahor inf. abs. as narrative G-III-7

2:33 weka adib Hi. inf.cstr. without -h- 3:21 leheraoh Ni. inf. cstr (Shiloh) G-II-C9 4:6 meh qol (Philistine) only 3x in OT G-II-A9 "woe 4:7 & 8 o y , ah" (Philistine) 4:14 meh qol (Eli, of Shiloh) G-II-A9 4:16 meh-hayah (Eli) also Ex. 32:1, 23, 2 Sam. 1:4, Eccl. 7:10, Lam. 5:1

4:19 lalat 1-inf.cstr. ldt•„ ltt•„ It 6:2 bammeh (Philistine) G-II-A9 "a" (indef 6:7 ehar . art.) G-III-4 7:9 ehad "a" (indef . art.) G-III-4 "a" (indef 7:12 ehat . art.) G-III-4 "go" (Saul) 9:7 azal L-II-2 9:13 kehayyom only here in Sam 10:7 tabo enah [tabonah] Q: phonetic spelling31 "where?" ay•¨a cf 10:14 an . 21:9 G-I-C2

12:11 bedan Bedan•©Barak phonetic spelling32

12:24 yer'u impv. m.pl. - phonetic spelling33 12:24 ki reu, phonetic spelling34 13:21 lehaqqardummim in Benjamin G-II-D9 "payment" (?) 13:21 happesirah G-II-B4 14:1 hallaz *ha-l-di "this person there"

46 ORIENT

SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL

Old South Arabic, Arabic-Jud. 6:20, 1 Sam. 17:26, 2 Ki. 4:25, 23:17, Zech. 2:8, Dan. 8:16; cf. hallazah Gen. 24:65, 37:19. Common Semitic; see on 21:11. "while" 14:19 ad G-II-D5 14:27 wattaronah [watta'ornah] phonetic spelling35 "become tired" *yp 14:28, 31 wayya ap MHeb, 1QHod, JAram, Syr. (HALOT, 820) -2 Sam. 21:15, Jer. 4:31, Jud. 4:21 14:29 debas hazzeh lack of ha- for def. noun. See 6:18; also 17:17, Jer. 40:3. "despised" phonetic spelling36 15:9 nemibzah 15:14 meh qol (Samuel) G-II-A9 "kingdom" 15:28 mamlekut L-I-43 16:20 hamorlehem calque: imeru 17:12 hazzeh "who is" = Ugaritic hnd

17:47 yehosia -h- Hi. vb. G-II-C4 "twice" =pm+pn 18:11 paamayim cf. L-I-59 20:19 tered meod fem. "sun"? 20:36, 37 hahesi variant form; also in 2 Ki. 9:24 (ab. Jehu) 21:2, 22:9 nobeh (Doeg) directional -h 21:9 'in N/E dialect? cf. 10:14. ay --->i (Aram/Akk) "this" only other 21:11 lazeh - 25:21 , Isa. 58:5, Eccl. 6:5; see on 14:1 22:13 saol inf. abs. as narrative G-III-7 22:20 ehad "a" (indef . art.) not in G-III-4 "obtain 23:7 nikkar , acquire" L-II-40 25:6 lehay "to my brethren"; vowel sandhi37 25:21 lazeh "this": see 21:11 . 25:26 heosea inf. abs. as narrative G-III-7 25:32 abigal Abigal ai•¨a (sandhi) 25:34 wattaboti impf-ti: a dialectal form?

26:7, 11f., 16 meraasoto fem.sg. ending not in G-II-B2 "a" (indef 26:20 ehad . art.) not in G-III-4 "a" (indef 27:1 ehad . art.) not in G-III-4 27:8 haggirzi [haggizril metathesis38 27:10 al "where?" = n cf. Akk. ali (where?) CAD, A/1, 338f.

Vol. XXXVIII 2003 47 28:7 baalatob fem. "sun" "your enemy" 28:16 araka G-I-A3 29:4 ubammeh Philistine G-II-A9 31:10, 12 sari vowel sandhi39 Cf. Bet sean (Josh. 17:11, 16, Jud. 1:27, 1 Ki. 4:12 [2x], 1 Chr. 7:29).

2 Samuel "what?" (David) also 1 Sam 1:4 meh-hayah . 4:16. "no" 1:21 al - noun x2 G-III-15 "ascribed to David , but note northern setting of Gilboa"

1:23 naim "you were very dear to me" (NIV) 1:26 naamta 3:3 (K.) 2abigal Abigal see 1 Sam. 25:32 12:11 fem. "sun" cf. 1 Sam. 20:19 14:19 is "there is" G-II-D12 16:2 Iehallehem "kingdom" (Ziba [of Benjamin]?) 16:3 mamlekut L-I-43 "battle 17:11 qerab , war" Aramaic loan word 17:25 abigal Abigal see 1 Sam. 25:32 17:27 Barzillay = Bar-zillay with an Aramaic element bar Also 19:32, 33, 34, 35, 40, 21:8. "a" (indef 18:10 ehad . art.) G-III-4 21:12 Bet san See 1 Sam. 31:10 21:20 leharapah non-elision of h 21:22 leharapah non-elision of h ch. 22 northern origin?4° 23:1-7 R (1988)

1 neum in a human context L-I-46 1 al DN R (1988)

2 millato Aramaic L-I-42 "to speak to" (?) 2 dibber-bi R (1988) "to be" 5 ken R (1988) 6 kullaham G-II-A4

23:1 naim L-I-48

48 ORIENT

SOME EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC VARIANTS IN 1-2 SAMUEL

23:31 Barhumi Bar-humi (Barhumite) with an Aramaic element bar ?

Notes 1 For example , see P. K. McCarter, I Samuel: A New Translation with Introduction, Notes & Commentary, Anchor Bible 8; Garden City: Doubleday, 1980, 5. 2 D . T. Tsumura, "Scribal Errors or Phonetic Spellings? Samuel as an Aural Text," Vetus Testamentum 49 (1999), 390-411. 3 See D . T. Tsumura, "Vowel sandhi in Biblical Hebrew," Zeitschrift .fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 109 (1997), 575-88. 4 F . M. Cross, Jr. & D. N. Freedman, Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry, Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 21, Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975, 125. 5 Cross & Freedman , Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry, 125-26. 6 For a detailed discussion , see my commentary, D. T. Tsumura, The First Book of Samuel, New International Commentary on the Old Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, forthcoming. 7 In 1980 , F. I. Andersen & D. N. Freedman were cautious about accepting the supposition that the book of Hosea was written in a dialect of the northern kingdom; see Hosea: A New

Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible 24, Garden City: Doubleday, 1980, 67. 8 Gary A . Rendsburg, "Some False Leads in the Identification of Late Biblical Hebrew Texts: The Cases of Genesis 24 and 1 Samuel 2:27-36," Journal of Biblical Literature 121

(2002), 37. 9 F . M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973, 151-56, n. 53; 0. Loretz, Psalm 29:

Kanaanaische El- and Baaltraditionen in judischer Sicht, Ugaritisch-Biblische Literatur 2, Soest: CIS, 1984, 11-22; J. Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea: Echoes of a

Canaanite Myth in the Old Testament, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985, 57-61. 1° G . A. Rendsburg, "Morphological Evidence for Regional Dialects in Ancient Hebrew," in W. R. Bodine (ed.), Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1992, 69-70. 11 See various works by G . A. Rendsburg, especially Linguistic Evidence for the Northern

Origin of Selected Psalms, Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 43, Atlanta:

Scholars Press, 1990. 12 I .e., G. A. Rendsburg, "A Comprehensive Guide to Israelian Hebrew: Grammar and Lexicon," Grammar, III (Syntax), Example 3, in this issue of Orient. 13 One should note that there are many lexical similarities between Ugaritic and Arabic and

between Ugaritic and Ethiopic; see Al-Yasin, The Lexical Relation between Ugaritic and Arabic, New York: Shelton College, 1952; M. C. Fisher, The Lexical Relationship between Ugaritic and

Ethiopic, Brandeis University, Ph.D. thesis, 1969. Also, Ugaritic information should be used with great caution for explaining rare terms as "IH", for the Ugaritic term itself might have been

first explained by Biblical or . Moreover, it should be noted that there were dialectal variants within the Ugaritic language itself; see C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook,

Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965, •˜3.6, 5.1 & 5.7. 14 See D . T. Tsumura, "'The Deluge' (mabbul) in Psalm 29:10," Forschungen 20

(1988), 351-355. 15 G . A. Rendsburg, "The Northern Origin of 'The Last Words of David' (2 Sam 23,1-7)," Biblica 69 (1988), 113-21. 16 T . Bynon, Historical Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977, 17-22. 17 G . A. Rendsburg, "Monophthongization of aw / ay •„ a in Eblaite and in Northwest

Semitic," Eblaitica 2 (1990), 109. 18 S . R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel,

Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913, 172.

Vol. XXXVIII 2003 49

19 L . Koehler, W. Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Trans. by M. E. J. Richardson, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994, 343. 20 Tsumura , "Vowel sandhi in Biblical Hebrew," 586. 21 Tsumura , "Scribal Errors or Phonetic Spellings?" 399. 22 C . R. Krahmalkov, "The Enclitic Particle TA/TI in Hebrew," Journal of Biblical Literature 89 (1970), 218-19. 23 See D . Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1997, 29. 24 The MT is' ehad is usually translated as "a certain man" (NRSV; NASB; NIV; REB) as in

2 Sam. 18:10. But with this translation, the plural of ,sopim (Zuphite) cannot be explained satisfactorily. Hence most scholars take the pl. of sopim as dittography of the following m

and read swpy mhr 'prym: e.g. "a certain man from Ramathaim, a Zuphite from•c" (REB). Another suggestion is to take sopim without emendation as plural and to connect it with

Ramathaim: e.g. "Ramathaim-zophim" (KJV; NASB); "Ramathaim of the Zuphites" (JPS). However, it is also possible to see here an instance of the AXB pattern, in which AB: 'ehad

.sopim (one of the Zuphites) is interrupted by the insertion of X: min-haramatayim (from Ramathaim) while keeping the relationship between A and B; hence X modifies A B as a whole. With this explanation, the pl. form sopim causes no problem, and the phrase is translated "one of the Zuphites from Ramathaim" . The first part of v. 1, hence, might be translated as "There was a man , one of the Zuphites from Ramathaim, from the hill country of Ephraim;". See my forthcoming commentary on 1 Samuel. See note 6 (above). 25 See J . Ikeda's article in this volume. 26 I .e., Rendsburg, "The Northern Origin of 'The Last Words of David' (2 Sam 23,1-7)"

(1988). 27 See above . 28 D . T. Tsumura, "The Interpretation of the Ugaritic Funerary Text KTU 1.161," in E. Matsushima (ed.), Official Cult and Popular Religion in the Ancient Near East, Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1993, 54-55. 29 I .e., G. A. Rendsburg, "A Comprehensive Guide to Israelian Hebrew: Grammar and Lexicon," Section V (Lexicon), I (Nouns and Adjectives), Example 12, of this issue of Orient. 30 D . T. Tsumura, "hamor lehem (1 Sam xvi 20)," Vetus Testamentum 42 (1992), 412-14. 31 Tsumura , "Scribal Errors or Phonetic Spellings?" 393. 32 D . T. Tsumura, "Bedan, a copyist's error?", Vetus Testamentum 45 (1995), 122-23. 33 Tsumura , "Vowel sandhi in Biblical Hebrew," 585. 34 Tsumura , "Scribal Errors or Phonetic Spellings?" 399. 35 Tsumura , "Scribal Errors or Phonetic Spellings?" 398. 36 Tsumura , "Scribal Errors or Phonetic Spellings?" 409. 37 Tsumura , "Vowel sandhi in Biblical Hebrew," 587. 38 Tsumura , "Scribal Errors or Phonetic Spellings?" 392. 39 Tsumura , "Vowel sandhi in Biblical Hebrew," 585. 40 See above .

50 ORIENT