Niphalisation in Ancient Hebrew: A Perspective from the Samaritan Tradition: SBL Annual Meeting 2020 Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew Seminar: Samaritan Hebrew and Dialectal Diversity in Second Temple Hebrew

Aaron Hornkohl

doi:10.25159/2663-6573/9207

Authors

Aaron Hornkohl University of Cambridge, United Kingdom https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3526-3818

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25159/2663-6573/9207

Keywords:

niphal, vocalisation, reading tradition, pronunciation tradition, written tradition, consonantal tradition, Samaritan Hebrew, Tiberian Hebrew, Masoretic Text, Late Biblical Hebrew, Second Temple Hebrew, diachronic perspective

Abstract

A development in verbal morphology common to multiple forms of ancient Hebrew involves the shift of stative, intransitive, and weakly transitive verbs from G-stem (qal) to N-stem (niphal). Like other Hebrew traditions that crystallised in the Second Temple period, the reading tradition of the Samaritan Pentateuch (consisting of the oral realisation of the constituent consonantal, vocalic, and prosodic components) presents a relatively advanced stage of the shift. Against this tendency, however, Samaritan Hebrew also at times appears to preserve archaic qal morphology. This study surveys salient manifestations of “niphalisation” in Samaritan Hebrew, contrasting them with parallel features in Tiberian Hebrew and other forms of ancient Hebrew and Aramaic, especially Second Temple varieties, and seeks to reveal salient commonalities. While highlighting pertinent secondary features common to Second Temple period sources, the paper also emphasises the historical depth of the shift from qal to niphal.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Abegg, Martin G., Jr. 1999–2009. Qumran Non-biblical Manuscripts (QUMRAN). Version 4.6, run on Accordance 13.1.5.

Bar-Asher, Moshe. 1992. “Ma‘arekhet ha-binyanim bi-lshon ha-Tana'im.” Mehqarim be-Lashon 5–6: 123–51. [Hebrew]

Bar-Asher, Moshe. 2016. “The Contribution of Tannaitic Hebrew to Understanding Biblical Hebrew.” In A Handbook of Biblical Hebrew, 2 vols., edited by W. Randal Garr and Steven E. Fassberg, I:203–15. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. https://doi.org/10.5325/j.ctv18r6rnv.18 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5325/j.ctv18r6rnv.18

Bendavid, Abba. 1967–1971. Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew. 2 vols. Tel-Aviv: Dvir. [Hebrew]

Ben-Hayyim, Ze’ev. 1977. The Words of the Pentateuch. Vol. 4 of The Literary and Oral Tradition of Hebrew and Aramaic amongst the Samaritans. Jerusalem: The Academy of the Hebrew Language.

Ben-Hayyim, Ze’ev. 2000. A Grammar of Samaritan Hebrew: Based on the Recitation of the Law in Comparison with the Tiberian and Other Jewish Traditions. Revised English edition. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University Magnes Press.

Breuer, Yochanan. 2013. “Morphology: Rabbinic Hebrew.” In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, edited by Geoffrey Khan, II: 735–41. Leiden: Brill.

Dihi, Haim. 2004. “Morphological and Lexical Innovations in the Book of Ben Sira.” PhD diss., Ben Gurion University of the Negev. [Hebrew]

Hornkohl, Aaron D. 2018. “Diachronic Exceptions in the Comparison of Tiberian and Qumran Hebrew: The Preservation of Early Linguistic Features in Dead Sea Scrolls Biblical Hebrew.” In The Reconfiguration of Hebrew in the Hellenistic Period: Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira at Strasbourg University, June 2014, edited by Jan Joosten, Daniel Machiela, and Jean-Sébastien Rey, 61–92. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 124. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004366770_006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004366770_006

Hornkohl, Aaron D. 2020a. “Discord between the Tiberian Written and Reading Traditions: Two Case Studies.” In Studies in Semitic Vocalisation, edited by Aaron D. Hornkohl and Geoffrey Khan, 227–80. Cambridge: University of Cambridge and Open Book Publishers. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0207.07 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0207.07

Hornkohl, Aaron D. 2020b. “The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Tiberian Reading Tradition: Shared Departures from the Masoretic Written Tradition.” Dead Sea Discoveries 27 (3): 410–25. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-bja10012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15685179-bja10012

Joosten, Jan. 2015. “The Tiberian Vocalization and the Hebrew of the Second Temple Period.” In Hebrew of the Late Second Temple Period: Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, edited by Eibert Tigchelaar and Pierre Van Hecke, 25–36. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 114. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004299313_004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004299313_004

Joüon, Paul, S. J., and Takamitsu Muraoka. 2006. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. 3rd revised edition. Subsidia Biblica 27. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute Press.

Kemmer, Suzanne. 1993. The Middle Voice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.23 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.23

Khan, Geoffrey. 2020. The Tiberian Pronunciation Tradition of Biblical Hebrew Vol. 1. Cambridge Semitic Languages and Cultures 1. Cambridge: University of Cambridge and Open Book Publishers. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0194.01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0163

Qimron, Elisha. 2018. A Grammar of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Between Bible and Mishnah. Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben-Zvi.

Reymond, Eric D. 2016. “The Passive Qal in the Hebrew of the Second Temple Period, especially as Found in the Wisdom of Ben Sira.” In Sibyls, Scriptures, and Scrolls: John Collins at Seventy, edited by Joel Baden, Hindy Najman, and Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar, 1110–27. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 175. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004324749_058 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004324749_058

Tal, Abraham, and Moshe Florentin (eds.). 2010. The Pentateuch: The Samaritan Version and the Masoretic Version. Tel Aviv: The Haim Rubin Tel Aviv University Press.

Van Wolde, Ellen. 2019. “The Niphal as Middle Voice and Its Consequence for Meaning.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 43 (3): 453–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309089217743160 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309089217743160