![]() “.ur Lexicon is, by definition, diachronic in nature and thus constitutes part and parcel of the discipline of Historical Linguistics. In this volume the authors actually state that interaction with different views is pointless: Hurvitz, A Concise Lexicon of Late Biblical Hebrew. Now, the unfortunate thing is that certain major scholars have started ignoring this recent progress, giving rise to a remarkable and unsettling divide in the study of the Hebrew Bible between old-fashioned linguistic dating and modern-day historical linguistics.Ī case in point is the recently published magnum opus of A. ![]() Far fewer publications now rely solely on the traditional method, while many (younger) scholars are looking for new ways to take the field forward. This shift is apparent when reviewing conference papers and publications from recent years. Hurvitz, and so on, with its inherent assumptions and weaknesses, to the more widespread, robust, and descriptive approach of historical linguistics. In our opinion, the ongoing outcome of this recent discussion is that within the field of Biblical Hebrew studies a shift is underway from the outlook and method of linguistic dating as formulated by W. The interaction has taken place at conferences, in authored and edited books, in journals, and in various online venues including The Bible and Interpretation. Since the early 2000s there has been substantial and beneficial discussion of the linguistic nature of the Hebrew Bible and the role of language for determining the historical origins of biblical writings. But when it comes down to how this looks in practice, misunderstandings have become abundant and a very unfortunate situation has developed in the field. They agree that scholarship entails dialogue, debate, self-criticism, evaluation, correction, and so on. Most ancient Hebrew language scholars probably agree broadly about what scholarship and scholarly method are and should be. Radboud University Nijmegen & University of Sydneyĭepartment of Hebrew, Biblical and Jewish Studies ![]() Unhistorical Hebrew Linguistics: A Cautionary TaleĪ Very Tall “Cautionary Tale”: A Response to Ron Hendel See Also: Linguistic Dating of Biblical Texts ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |