Diachronic approach to Biblical Hebrew

In 2014 Avi Hurvitz published A Concise Lexicon of Late Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Innovations in the Writings of the Second Temple Period. In the present article we offer an alternative, quantitative interpretation of the data in the Lexicon. Our main conclusions are that the late language cataloged in the Lexicon is rare and idiosyncratic in late biblical writings and accordingly the value of the late language for linguistic periodization and linguistic dating is negligible.

In this essay we summarize the status quaestionis of diachronic linguistic study of Biblical Hebrew as reflected principally in some major publications of the recent several years. We reflect critically on research objectives, perspectives on sources, documentation of variation and change, and periodization issues. We also include a detailed bibliography of relevant works published since our Historical Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew (November 2014).

Can the Ages of Biblical Literature be Discerned Without Literary Analysis? Review-Essay of Ronald Hendel and Jan Joosten, How Old is the Hebrew Bible? A Linguistic, Textual, and Historical Study (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library; New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2018; xvi + 221). Hendel and Joosten’s book is chock-full of insightful observations on a multitude of linguistic, textual, and cultural/historical phenomena, and they argue cogently that the best method for dating biblical writings should include all three of these data sources. Nonetheless, their answer to the question, "How Old is the Hebrew Bible?," is unoriginal because they do little more than offer a sophisticated repackaging of the traditional linguistic dating approach and results, and it is also unsatisfactory because they eschew literary criticism in the formulation of their model of consilience for determining the ages of biblical literature.

Can the Ages of Biblical Literature be Discerned Without Literary Analysis? Review-Essay of Ronald Hendel and Jan Joosten, How Old is the Hebrew Bible? A Linguistic, Textual, and Historical Study (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library; New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2018; xvi + 221). Hendel and Joosten’s book is chock-full of insightful observations on a multitude of linguistic, textual, and cultural/historical phenomena, and they argue cogently that the best method for dating biblical writings should include all three of these data sources. Nonetheless, their answer to the question, "How Old is the Hebrew Bible?," is unoriginal because they do little more than offer a sophisticated repackaging of the traditional linguistic dating approach and results, and it is also unsatisfactory because they eschew literary criticism in the formulation of their model of consilience for determining the ages of biblical literature.

Volume 1 introduces the field of linguistic dating of biblical texts, particularly to intermediate and advanced students of biblical Hebrew who have a reasonable background in the language, having completed at least an introductory course at the university or divinity school level, but also to scholars of the Hebrew Bible in general who have not been exposed to the full scope of issues. The book is useful to a wide range of readers by introducing topics at a basic level before entering into detailed discussion. Among the many issues discussed in this volume are: What is it that makes Archaic Biblical Hebrew 'archaic', Early Biblical Hebrew 'early', and Late Biblical Hebrew 'late'? Does linguistic typology, i.e. different linguistic characteristics, convert easily and neatly into linguistic chronology, i.e. different historical origins? A large amount of text samples are presented for study. Readers are introduced to significant linguistic features of the texts by means of notes on the passages. For use as a textbook in a classroom context, the detailed notes on the text samples provide a background, concrete illustrations, and a point of departure for discussion of the general and theoretical issues discussed in each chapter.

After a brief introduction (Chapter 1), the following chapters look in detail at the principles and methodology used to differentiate Archaic, Early and Late Biblical Hebrew (Chapters 2-5, 12), the complicating matters of dialects and diglossia and textual criticism (Chapters 7, 13), and the significance of extra-biblical sources, including Amarna Canaanite, Ugaritic, Aramaic, Hebrew inscriptions of the monarchic period, Qumran and Mishnaic Hebrew, the Hebrew language of Ben Sira and Bar Kochba, and also Egyptian, Akkadian, Persian and Greek loanwords (Chapters 6, 8-12).

Volume 2 builds on the topics outlined in volume 1. It begins with a book by book survey of scholarship on the origins of biblical sources, passages and books, with particular reference to the linguistic evidence scholars have cited in arriving at these conclusions. This is followed by an detailed synthesis of the topics introduced in the first volume, a series of detailed case studies on various linguistic issues, extensive tables of grammatical and lexical features, and a comprehensive bibliography.

The authors argue that the scholarly use of language in dating biblical texts, and even the traditional standpoint on the chronological development of biblical Hebrew, require a thorough re-evaluation, and propose a new perspective on linguistic variety in biblical Hebrew. ‘Early’ Biblical Hebrew and ‘Late’ Biblical Hebrew do not represent different chronological periods in the history of biblical Hebrew, but instead represent co-existing styles of literary Hebrew throughout the biblical period.

Ancient Hebrew like all natural languages evolved through time, and silhouettes of its history are traceable in the literary writings of the Hebrew Bible. But, historical linguistics is not text-dating, and the latter is what Hendel and Joosten’s How Old Is the Hebrew Bible? is largely about.

Chapter 1, "All Things Change: Language and Method" (pp. 1-10), underscores that languages and texts change, Biblical Hebrew (BH) and the Hebrew Bible (HB) were not stable entities, and linguistic and textual changes allow us to discern different temporal states of BH and the HB. A preliminary example illustrates how Hendel and Joosten (henceforth RH-JJ) believe textual criticism and diachronic linguistics complement each other: the likely older passive qal of ‫י‬ ‫ל‬ ‫ד‬ (yalad) as the ketiv in MT 2 Sam 3:2 and as a misvocalized pual in MT 2 Sam 3:5, versus the likely younger niphal form as the qere in 2 Sam 3:2 (Masoretic Text [MT]) and in 4QSam a and synoptic 1 Chr 3:1 (MT). Having considered this example of how BH changed over time, what RH-JJ consider a substantial resistance to historical linguistic inquiry in contemporary biblical scholarship is considered, and the focus falls on Carr's The Formation of the Hebrew Bible, and in particular on his analysis of the Song of Songs in which, they claim, he dismisses the evidence of language for dating. Chapter 2, "Kinds and Causes of Linguistic Change" (pp. 11-30), provides a partial sketch with illustrative examples of how BH changed, focusing on the kinds and causes of linguistic change, including phonological change, lexical and morphosyntactic change, and change due to language contact.

The intuition of established scholars often holds them back from appreciating revolutionary advances in the understanding of how the biblical texts evolved and how to view their language in that context. Kuhn’s theory of paradigm shifts helps elucidate what is currently going on in our field. We use Richard Friedman’s new book on the exodus as an example of the old paradigm and juxtapose it with the emerging paradigm that is founded on more robust data collection and analysis.

http://bibleinterp.com/articles/2017/12/ehr418003.shtml

Summaries of our work have often suggested that we deny that ancient Hebrew developed as other natural languages do. This is diagnosed as the reason we deny the possibility of dating biblical compositions on the basis of their language, which is the major focus of scholars working in the previously dominant Masoretic Text (MT)-only paradigm for understanding the development of ancient Hebrew. In fact, as we have already explained, the choice that we have offered has never been “chronology or no chronology.” However, we have always stressed the extreme difficulties that the nature of the sources and the evidence they provide cause for attempts to make valid chronological statements about ancient Hebrew.

Volume 1 introduces the field of linguistic dating of biblical texts, particularly to intermediate and advanced students of biblical Hebrew who have a reasonable background in the language, having completed at least an introductory course at the university or divinity school level, but also to scholars of the Hebrew Bible in general who have not been exposed to the full scope of issues. The book is useful to a wide range of readers by introducing topics at a basic level before entering into detailed discussion. Among the many issues discussed in this volume are: What is it that makes Archaic Biblical Hebrew 'archaic', Early Biblical Hebrew 'early', and Late Biblical Hebrew 'late'? Does linguistic typology, i.e. different linguistic characteristics, convert easily and neatly into linguistic chronology, i.e. different historical origins? A large amount of text samples are presented for study. Readers are introduced to significant linguistic features of the texts by means of notes on the passages. For use as a textbook in a classroom context, the detailed notes on the text samples provide a background, concrete illustrations, and a point of departure for discussion of the general and theoretical issues discussed in each chapter.

After a brief introduction (Chapter 1), the following chapters look in detail at the principles and methodology used to differentiate Archaic, Early and Late Biblical Hebrew (Chapters 2-5, 12), the complicating matters of dialects and diglossia and textual criticism (Chapters 7, 13), and the significance of extra-biblical sources, including Amarna Canaanite, Ugaritic, Aramaic, Hebrew inscriptions of the monarchic period, Qumran and Mishnaic Hebrew, the Hebrew language of Ben Sira and Bar Kochba, and also Egyptian, Akkadian, Persian and Greek loanwords (Chapters 6, 8-12).

Volume 2 builds on the topics outlined in volume 1. It begins with a book by book survey of scholarship on the origins of biblical sources, passages and books, with particular reference to the linguistic evidence scholars have cited in arriving at these conclusions. This is followed by an detailed synthesis of the topics introduced in the first volume, a series of detailed case studies on various linguistic issues, extensive tables of grammatical and lexical features, and a comprehensive bibliography.

The authors argue that the scholarly use of language in dating biblical texts, and even the traditional standpoint on the chronological development of biblical Hebrew, require a thorough re-evaluation, and propose a new perspective on linguistic variety in biblical Hebrew. ‘Early’ Biblical Hebrew and ‘Late’ Biblical Hebrew do not represent different chronological periods in the history of biblical Hebrew, but instead represent co-existing styles of literary Hebrew throughout the biblical period.