Mova0.5 pre-release⌕
☰
home / docs / papers / Ancient Hebrew / Anaphora and Deixis in Tiberian Hebrew: Semantically Mapping the Case for a Distance-Neutral Demonstrative

Anaphora and Deixis in Tiberian Hebrew: Semantically Mapping the Case for a Distance-Neutral Demonstrative

What it is about

Grammars usually say Hebrew has a near demonstrative (זֶה "this") and a far one (הַהוּא "that", the third-person pronoun with the article). Using the typology of Diessel and Himmelmann, the author builds a semantic map of demonstrative and anaphoric functions (situational deixis, recognitional, anaphora to topics and non-topics, focus and contrastive anaphora, cataphoric and anaphoric discourse deixis) and sorts every Pentateuch occurrence of both paradigms, with the deictic examples listed verse by verse. Finding: the זֶה paradigm is distance-neutral, pointing to near and far things alike; deixis is 35% of its Pentateuch uses, and much of the rest is discourse deixis, especially closing or opening lists ("these are the sons of Ham", 22% cataphoric, 35% anaphoric discourse deixis). The הוּא paradigm has no deictic use left: it is anaphoric (82%), mostly topic anaphora (53%) and non-topic anaphora (23%), plus anaphoric discourse deixis ("after these things") and a rare recognitional use ("that great wilderness", Deut 1:19).

Ideas

For Mova

I1 and I4 go into Pronouns, particles and prepositions (demonstratives). I2 is a resolver rule for the world reader and for tools/macula/src/prag.rs participant tracking (09-discourse.md). I3 is a segmentation cue for 09-discourse.md and the Torah course. The paper's verse lists are a ready gold sample for checking I2 and I3.

Topics: Discourse analysis · Coreference resolution

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.7146/hn.v1i2.142922

@inproceedings{kummerow2014anaphora,
  title = {{Anaphora and Deixis in Tiberian Hebrew: Semantically Mapping the Case for a Distance-Neutral Demonstrative}},
  author = {Kummerow, David},
  booktitle = {HIPHIL Novum 1},
  year = {2014},
  doi = {10.7146/hn.v1i2.142922},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.7146/hn.v1i2.142922}
}

References

172 references, 2 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Allegro, J. M. 1955. “Uses of the Semitic Demonstrative Z in Hebrew.” Vetus Testamentum 5: 309-312. find
  2. Anstey, Matthew P. 2005. “Towards a Typological Presentation of Tiberian Hebrew.” Hebrew Studies 46: 71-128. ↗
  3. Anstey, Matthew P. 2006. “Towards a Functional Discourse Grammar Analysis of Tiberian Hebrew.” Published PhD diss., Vrije Universiteit. find
  4. Ariel, Mira. 1990. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London: Routledge. find
  5. Barth, Jacob. 1913. Die Pronominalbildung in den semitischen Sprachen. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs. find
  6. Becher, Victor. 2010. “Differences in the Use of Deictic Expressions in English and German Texts.” Linguistics 48: 1309-1342. ↗
  7. Blake, Frank R. 1912. “Comparative Syntax of the Combinations Formed by the Noun and Its Modifiers in Semitic.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 32: 135-267. ↗
  8. Blau, Joshua. 2010. Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew. Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic 2. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. ↗
  9. Bolkestein, A. Machtelt and Michel van de Grift. 1994. “Participant Tracking in Latin Discourse.” Pages 283-302 in Linguistic Studies on Latin: Selected Papers from the 6th International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics (Budapest, 23–27 March 1991). Edited by József Herman. Studies in Language Companion Series 28. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  10. Bosch, Peter and Carla Umbach. 2007. “Reference Determination for Demonstrative Pronouns.” Pages 39-51 in Intersentential Pronominal Reference in Child and Adult Language: Proceedings of the Conference on Intersentential Pronominal Reference in Child and Adult Language. Edited by Dagmar Bittner and Natalia Gagarina. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 48. Berlin: ZAS. ↗
  11. Brin, Gershon. 2001. The Concept of Time in the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 39. Leiden: Brill. ↗
  12. Brockelmann, Carl. 1956. Hebräische Syntax. Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag. find
  13. Bühler, Karl. 1934. Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprachen. Jena: Fischer. find
  14. Chen, Rong. 1990. “English Demonstratives: A Case of Semantic Expansion.” Language Sciences 12: 139-153. ↗
  15. Childs, Brevard S. 1963. “A Study of the Formula, ‘Until This Day’.” Journal of Biblical Literature 82: 279-292. ↗
  16. Comrie, Bernard. 1997. “Pragmatic Binding: Demonstratives as Anaphors in Dutch.” Berkeley Linguistics Society 23: 51-61. ↗
  17. Comrie, Bernard. 1998a. “Reference-Tracking: Description and Explanation.” Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 51: 335-346. ↗
  18. Comrie, Bernard. 1998b. “Rethinking the Typology of Relative Clauses.” Language Design 1: 59-85. find
  19. Comrie, Bernard, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Martin Haspelmath. 2005. “Introduction.” Pages 1-8 in The World Atlas of Language Structures. Edited by Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  20. Comrie, Bernard and Tania Kuteva. 2005. “Relativization Strategies.” Pages 494-501 in The World Atlas of Language Structures. Edited by Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  21. Conklin, Blane W. 2005. “Oath Formulae in Classical Hebrew and Other Semitic Languages.” PhD diss., University of Chicago. find
  22. Cornish, Francis. 1999. Anaphora, Discourse, and Understanding: Evidence from English and French. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  23. Cristofaro, Sonia. 2009. “Grammatical Categories and Relations: Universality vs. Language-Specificity and Construction-Specificity.” Language and Linguistics Compass 3: 441-479. ↗
  24. Croft, William. 2000. “Parts of Speech as Language Universals and as Language-Particular Categories.” Pages 65-102 in Approaches to the Typology of Word Classes. Edited by Petra M. Vogel and Bernard Comrie. Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 23. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. ↗
  25. Croft, William. 2002. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  26. Croft, William. 2003. Typology and Universals. 2nd ed. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ↗
  27. Croft, William. 2004. “Syntactic Theories and Syntactic Methodology: A Reply to Seuren.” Journal of Linguistics 40: 637-654. ↗
  28. Croft, William. 2005a. “Logical and Typological Arguments for Radical Construction Grammar.” Pages 273-314 in Construction Grammar: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions. Edited by Jan-Ola Östman and Mirjam Fried. Constructional Approaches to Language 3. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ↗
  29. Croft, William. 2005b. “Word Classes, Parts of Speech, and Syntactic Argumentation.” Linguistic Typology 9: 431-441. find
  30. Croft, William. 2007a. “Beyond Aristotle and Gradience: A Reply to Aarts.” Studies in Language 31: 409-430. ↗
  31. Croft, William. 2007b. “The Origins of Grammar in the Verbalization of Experience.” Cognitive Linguistics 18: 339-383. ↗
  32. Croft, William. 2007c. “Typology and Linguistic Theory in the Past Decade: A Personal View.” Linguistic Typology 11: 79-91. ↗
  33. Croft, William. 2010a. “The Origins of Grammaticalization in the Verbalization of Experience.” Linguistics 48: 1-48. ↗
  34. Croft, William. 2010b. “Pragmatic Functions, Semantic Classes, and Lexical Categories.” Linguistics 48: 787-796. ↗
  35. Croft, William. 2010c. “Relativity, Linguistic Variation and Language Universals.” CogniTextes 4: 2-19. ↗
  36. Croft, William and Keith T. Poole. 2008a. “Inferring Universals from Grammatical Variation: Multidimensional Scaling for Typological Analysis.” Theoretical Linguistics 34: 1-37. ↗
  37. Croft, William and Keith T. Poole. 2008b. “Multidimensional Scaling and Other Techniques for Uncovering Universals.” Theoretical Linguistics 34: 75-84. ↗
  38. Croft, William, Hava Bat-Zeev Shyldkrot, and Suzanne Kemmer. 1987. “Diachronic Semantic Processes in the Middle Voice.” Pages 179-192 in Papers from the 7th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Edited by Anna Giacalone Ramat, Onofrio Carruba, and Giuliano Bernini. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science 48. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. find
  39. Cysouw, Michael and Diana Forker. 2009. “Reconstruction of Morphosyntactic Function: Nonspatial Usage of Spatial Case Marking in Tsezic.” Language 85: 588-617. ↗
  40. Diakonoff, I. M. and L. E. Kogan. 2007. “Akkadian Morphology.” Pages 3-48 in Morphologies of Asia and Africa, vol 1. Edited by Alan S. Kaye. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. find
  41. Diehl, Johannes F. 2004. Die Fortführung des Imperativs im Biblischen Hebräisch. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 286. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag. find
  42. Diesel, Anja A. 2006. »Ich bin Jahwe«: Der Aufstieg der Ich-bin-Jahwe-Aussage zum Schlüsselwort des alttestmentlichen Monotheismus. Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 110. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener. find
  43. Diessel, Holger. 1997. “The Diachronic Reanalysis of Demonstratives in Cross-Linguistic Perspective.” Chicago Linguistic Society 33: 83-97. find
  44. Diessel, Holger. 1999. Demonstratives: Form, Function, and Grammaticalization. Typological Studies in Language 42. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. find
  45. Diessel, Holger. 2003. “The Relationship between Demonstratives and Interrogatives.” Studies in Language 27: 635-655. ↗
  46. Diessel, Holger. 2005a. “Distance Contrasts in Demonstratives.” Pages 170-173 in The World Atlas of Language Structures. Edited by Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  47. Diessel, Holger. 2005b. “Pronominal and Adnominal Demonstratives.” Pages 174-177 in The World Atlas of Language Structures. Edited by Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  48. Diewald, Gabriele Maria. 1991. Deixis und Textsorten im Deutschen. Reihe Germanistische Linguistik 118. Tübingen: Niemeyer. ↗
  49. Disse, Andreas. 1998. Informationsstruktur im Biblischen Hebräisch: Sprachwissenschaftliche Grundlagen und exegetische Konsequenzen einer Korpusuntersuchung zu den Büchern Deuteronomium, Richter und 2 Könige. Arbeiten zu Text und Sprache im Alten Testament 56/1. St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag. find
  50. Dresher, Bezalel Elan. 2008. “The Word in Tiberian Hebrew.” Pages 95-111 in The Nature of the Word: Essays in Honor of Paul Kiparsky. Edited by Kristin Hanson and Sharob Inkelas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ↗
  51. Dryer, Matthew S. 1997. “Are Grammatical Relations Universal?” Pages 115-143 in Essays on Language Function and Language Type: Dedicated to T. Givón. Edited by Joan Bybee, John Haiman, and Sandra A. Thompson. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  52. Ehlich, Konrad. 1979. Verwendungen der Deixis beim sprachlichen Handeln: Linguistisch-philologische Untersuchungen zum hebräischen deiktischen System. 2 vols. Forum Linguisticum 24. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. find
  53. Ehlich, Konrad. 1982. “Anaphora and Deixis: Same, Similar, or Different?” Pages 315-338 in Speech, Place, and Action: Studies in Deixis and Related Topics. Edited by Robert J. Jarvella and Wolfgang Klein. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. find
  54. Ehlich, Konrad. 1983. “Deixis und Anapher.” Pages 79-97 in Essays on Deixis. Edited by Gisa Rauh. Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 188. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. find
  55. Ehlich, Konrad. 2007a. “Deixis und Anapher.” Pages 5-24 in Prozeduren des sprachlichen Handelns. Vol. 2 of Sprache und sprachliches Handeln. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. find
  56. Ehlich, Konrad. 2007b. Prozeduren des sprachlichen Handelns. Vol 2 of Sprache und sprachliches Handeln. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. find
  57. Enfield, N. J. 2003. “Demonstratives in Space and Interaction: Data from Lao Speakers and Implications for Semantic Analysis.” Language 79: 82-117. ↗
  58. Everett, Daniel and Barbara Kern. 1997. Wari': The Pacaas Novos Language of Western Brazil. London: Routledge. find
  59. Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. “Towards a Descriptive Framework for Spatial Deixis.” Pages 31-59 in Speech, Place, and Action: Studies in Deixis and Related Topics. Edited by Robert J. Jarvella and Wolfgang Klein. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. find
  60. Fillmore, Charles J. 1986. Lectures on Deixis. Center for the Study of Language and Information - Lecture Notes. Stanford: Stanford University Press. find
  61. Floor, Sebastiaan J. 2004. “From Information Structure, Topic and Focus, to Theme in Biblical Hebrew Narrative.” DLitt diss., University of Stellenbosch. find our card
  62. Foley, William A. and Robert D. van Valin, Jr. 1977. “On the Viability of the Notion of ‘Subject’ in Universal Grammar.” Berkeley Linguistics Society 3: 293-320. find
  63. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1997. “Grammaticalization of Number: From Demonstratives to Nominal and Verbal Plural.” Linguistic Typology 1: 193-242. ↗
  64. Fricke, Ellen. 2003. “Origo, Pointing, and Conceptualization—What Gestures Reveal about the Nature of the origo in Face-to-Face Interaction.” Pages 69-93 in Deictic Conceptualisation of Space, Time and Person. Edited by Friedrich Lenz. Pragmatics and Beyond 112. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. find
  65. Fricke, Ellen. 2007. Origo, Geste und Raum: Lokaldeixis im Deutschen. Linguistik - Impulse und Tendenzen 24. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. find
  66. Futato, Mark D. 2003. Beginning Biblical Hebrew. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. ↗
  67. Gagarina, Natalia. 2007. “The hare hugs the rabbit. He is white ... Who is white? Pronominal Anaphora in Russian.” Pages 139-170 in Intersentential Pronominal Reference in Child and Adult Language: Proceedings of the Conference on Intersentential Pronominal Reference in Child and Adult Language. Edited by Dagmar Bittner and Natalia Gagarina. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 48. Berlin: ZAS. ↗
  68. Garr, W. Randall. 2008. “The Medial Demonstratives לזלה , וזלה , and זלה .” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32: 383-389. find
  69. Gevirtz, Stanley. 1957. “On the Etymology of the Phoenician Particle שא .” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 16: 124-127. ↗
  70. Givón, Talmy. 1983. “Topic Continuity in Discourse: The Functional Domain of Switch Reference.” Pages 51-82 in Switch-Reference and Universal Grammar: Proceedings of a Symposium on Switch Reference and Universal Grammar, Winnipeg, May 1981. Edited by John Haiman and Pamela Munro. Typological Studies in Language 2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  71. Goedegebuure, Petra M. 2003. “Reference, Deixis and Focus in Hittite: The Demonstratives ka-‘This’, apa- ‘That’ and asi ‘Yon’.” PhD diss., Universiteit van Amsterdam. find
  72. Gross, Walter. 1996. Die Satzteilfolge im Verbalsatz alttestamentlicher Prosa: Untersucht an den Büchern Dtn, Ri und 2Kön. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 17. Tübingen: Mohr. ↗
  73. Gundel, Jeanette K., Nancy Hedberg, and Ron Zacharski. 1993. “Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse.” Language 69: 274-307. ↗
  74. Hardmeier, Christof. 1991. “Hermeneutik und Grammatik: Zum Zusammenhang von Sprachbeschreibung und Textwahrnehmung.” Pages 119-140 in Text, Methode, und Grammatik: Wolfgang Richter zum 65. Geburtstag. Edited by Walter Gross, Hubert Irsigler, and Helmut Satzinger. St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag. find
  75. Haspelmath, Martin. 1997a. From Space to Time: Temporal Adverbial’s in the World’s Languages. Lincom Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 3. München: Lincom Europa. ↗
  76. Haspelmath, Martin. 1997b. Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  77. Haspelmath, Martin. 1998. “Does Grammaticalization Need Reanalysis?” Studies in Language 22: 315-351. ↗
  78. Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. “Why is Grammaticalization Irreversible?” Linguistics 37: 1043-1068. ↗
  79. Haspelmath, Martin. 2003. “The Geometry of Grammatical Meaning: Semantic Maps and Cross-Linguistic Comparison.” Pages 211-242 in The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, vol 2. Edited by Michael Tomasello. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. ↗
  80. Haspelmath, Martin. 2004. “On Directionality in Language Change with Particular Reference to Grammaticalization.” Pages 17-44 in Up and Down the Cline: The Nature of Grammaticalization. Edited by Olga Fischer, Muriel Norde, and Harry Perridon. Typological Studies in Language 59. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  81. Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. “Pre-Established Categories Don’t Exist: Consequences for Language Description and Typology.” Linguistic Typology 11: 119-132. find
  82. Haspelmath, Martin. 2008. “Parametric Versus Functional Explanations of Syntactic Universals.” Pages 75-107 in The Limits of Syntactic Variation. Edited by Theresa Biberauer. Linguistics Today 132. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  83. Haspelmath, Martin. 2010a. “Comparative Concepts and Descriptive Categories in Crosslinguistic Studies.” Language 86: 663-687. ↗
  84. Haspelmath, Martin. 2010b. “Framework-Free Grammatical Theory.” Pages 341-365 in The Oxford Handbook of Grammatical Analysis. Edited by Bernd Heine and Heiko Narrog. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ↗
  85. Haspelmath, Martin. 2010c. “The Interplay between Comparative Concepts and Descriptive Categories.” Language 86: 696-699. find
  86. Haspelmath, Martin, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie, eds. 2005. The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
  87. Hasselbach, Rebecca. 2007. “Demonstratives in Semitic.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 127: 1-27. find
  88. Heath, Jeffrey. 1975. “Some Functional Relationships in Grammar.” Language 51: 89-104. ↗
  89. Heath, Jeffrey. 1980. “Nunggubuyu Deixis, Anaphora, and Culture.” Chicago Linguistic Society 16/2: 151-165. find
  90. Heath, Jeffrey. 1983. “Referential Tracking in Nunggubuyu (Australia).” Pages 129-149 in Switch-Reference and Universal Grammar: Proceedings of a Symposium on Switch Reference and Universal Grammar, Winnipeg, May 1981. Edited by John Haiman and Pamela Munro. Typological Studies in Language 2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. find
  91. Heath, Jeffrey. 1984. Functional Grammar of Nunggubuyu. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies 53. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. find
  92. Helmbrecht, Johannes. 2004. “Personal Pronouns: Form, Function, and Grammaticalization.” Habilitationsschrift, University of Erfurt. ↗
  93. Helmbrecht, Johannes. 2005. “Das Problem der Universalität der Nomen/Verb-Distinktion.” Arbeitspapiere des Seminars für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt 16: 1-34. find
  94. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 1996. “Demonstratives in Narrative Discourse: A Taxonomy of Universal Uses.” Pages 205-254 in Studies in Anaphora. Edited by Barbara Fox. Typological Studies in Language 33. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  95. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 1997. Deiktikon, Artikel, Nominalphrase: Zur Emergenz syntaktischer Struktur. Linguistische Arbeiten 362. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. find
  96. Holmstedt, Robert D. 2007. “The Etymologies of Hebrew ʾăšer and šeC-.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 66: 177-191. ↗
  97. Holmstedt, Robert D. 2013. “The Nexus between Text Criticism and Linguistics: A Case Study from Leviticus.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132: 473-494. find
  98. Holmstedt, Robert D. and Andrew R. Jones. 2014. “The Pronoun in Tripartite Verbless Clauses in Biblical Hebrew: Resumption for Left-Dislocation or Pronominal Copula?” Journal of Semitic Studies 59: 53-89. ↗
  99. Huehnergard, John. 2000. A Grammar of Akkadian. Harvard Semitic Museum Studies 45. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. find
  100. Huehnergard, John. 2004. “Afro-Asiatic.” Pages 138-159 in The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World’s Ancient Languages. Edited by Roger D. Woodard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. find
  101. Huehnergard, John. 2005. “Features of Central Semitic.” Pages 155-203 in Biblical and Oriental Essays in Memory of William L. Moran. Edited by Agustinus Gianto. Biblica et Orientalia 48. Roma: Pontificio Istituto Biblico. find
  102. Huehnergard, John. 2006. “On the Etymology of the Hebrew Relative šε-.” Pages 103-125 in Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting: Typological and Historical Perspectives. Edited by Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz. Jerusalem: Magnes. find
  103. Huehnergard, John and Na’ama Pat-El. 2007. “Some Aspects of the Cleft in Semitic Languages.” Pages 325-342 in Studies in Semitic and General Linguistics in Honor of Gideon Goldenberg. Edited by Tali Bar and Eran Cohen. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 334. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag. find
  104. Jarvalla, Robert and Wolfgang Klein, eds. 1982. Speech, Place, and Action: Studies in Deixis and Related Topics. Chichester: Wiley. find
  105. Joosten, Jan. 1991. “The Syntax of zeh Mošeh (Ex 32,1.23).” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 103: 412-415. find
  106. Joüon, Paul. 1923. Grammaire de l’Hébreu biblique. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico. find
  107. Joüon, Paul and T. Muraoka. 1993. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. 2 vols. Subsidia Biblica 14. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico. find
  108. Joüon, Paul and T. Muraoka. 2006. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Subsidia Biblica 27. Roma: Pontifical Biblical Institute. find
  109. Kaiser, Elsi and John Trueswell. 2004. “The Referential Properties of Dutch Pronouns and Demonstratives: Is Salience Enough?” Pages 137-149 in Proceedings of the Conference “sub8 - Sinn und Bedeutung”. Edited by Cécile Meier and Matthias Weisgerber. Arbeitspapiere/Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft 117. Konstanz: University of Konstanz. find
  110. Kalisch, M. M. 1884. A Hebrew Grammar, with Exercises. 2 vols. London: Green and Co. find
  111. Keller, Rudi. 1998. A Theory of Linguistic Signs. Translated by Kimberley Duenwald. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ↗
  112. Khan, Geoffrey A. 1997. “Tiberian Hebrew Phonology.” Pages 85-102 in Phonologies of Asia and Africa (Including the Caucasus), vol 1. Edited by Peter T. Daniels. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. find
  113. Kummerow, David. 2011. “Functional–Typological and Constructional Linguistic Studies on Tiberian Hebrew: Anaphora, Deixis, and the Verbal System.” ThD diss., Australian College of Theology. find
  114. Kummerow, David. 2012. “The Person That Isn’t: On Defining the Third-Person, Negatively and Positively So.” Australian Journal of Linguistics 32: 259-290. find
  115. Kummerow, David. 2013. Object Predication in Tiberian Hebrew: A Typological Approach to the Nonverbal Copula. KUSATU 16. Kamen: Hartmut Spenner. find
  116. Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. find
  117. Lazard, Gilbert. 2002. “Transitivity Revisited as an Example of a More Strict Approach in Typological Research.” Folia Linguistica 36: 141-190. ↗
  118. Lazard, Gilbert. 2004. “On the Status of Linguistics with Particular Regard to Typology.” The Linguistic Review 21: 389-411. ↗
  119. Lazard, Gilbert. 2006a. La quête des invariants interlangues: La linguistique est-elle une science? Bibliothèque de Grammaire et de Linguistique 23. Paris: Champion. find
  120. Lazard, Gilbert. 2006b. “More on Counterfactuality, and on Categories in General.” Linguistic Typology 10: 61-66. ↗
  121. Lehmann, Christian. 1983. “Rektion und syntaktische Relationen.” Folia Linguistica 17: 339-378. ↗
  122. Lehmann, Christian. 1995. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Lincom Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 1. München: Lincom. find
  123. Lehmann, Christian. 2002. “Thoughts on Grammaticalization: Second, Revised Edition.” Arbeitspapiere des Seminars für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt 9: i-171. find
  124. Lenz, Friedrich. 2003. Deictic Conceptualisation of Space, Time and Person. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 112. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  125. Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. find
  126. Levinson, Stephen C. 2003. Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity. Language, Culture and Cognition 5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. find
  127. Levinson, Stephen, Sérgio Meira, and The Language and Cognition Group. 2003. “‘Natural Concepts’ in the Spatial Topological Domain—Adpositional Meanings in Crosslinguistic Perspective: An Exercise in Semantic Typology.” Language 79: 485-516. find
  128. Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1988. “The Pragmatic Nature of Nominal Anaphora in To’aba’ita.” Studies in Language 12: 299-344. find
  129. Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1996. “Patterns of Anaphora in To’aba’ita Discourse.” Pages 379-411 in Studies in Anaphora. Edited by Barbara Fox. Typological Studies in Language 33. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. find
  130. Lyons, John. 1968. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ↗
  131. Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. find
  132. McCarter, P. Kyle, Jr. 2004. “Hebrew.” Pages 319-364 in The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World’s Ancient Languages. Edited by Roger D. Woodard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. find
  133. Michel, Diethelm. 2004. Der hebräische Nominalsatz. Vol 2 of Grundlegung einer hebräischen Syntax. Edited by Achim Behrens, Johannes F. Diehl, Anja A. Diesel, Reinhard G. Lehmann, Achim Müller, and Andreas Wagner. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener. find
  134. Miller, Cynthia L. 2003. The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Linguistic Analysis. Harvard Semitic Monographs 55. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. ↗
  135. Moravcsik, Edith A. 2007. “What is Universal about Typology?” Linguistic Typology 11: 27-41. ↗
  136. Morel, Mary-Annick and Laurent Danon-Boileau, eds. 1992. Deixis: Colloque en Sorbonne 8-9 Juin 1990. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. find
  137. Müller, Achim. 1997. “Formgeschichte und Textgrammatik am Beispiel der alttestamentlichen ‘Lehrrede’ in Prov 1-9.” Pages 83-100 in Studien zur hebräischen Grammatik. Edited by Andreas Wagner. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 156. Freiburg/Göttingen: Universitätsverlag/Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht. find
  138. Munch, Peter Andreas. 1936. The Expression bajjôm hāhū’: Is It an Eschatological Terminus Technicus? Skrifter utgitt av Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo. Oslo: I Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad. find
  139. Muraoka, Takamitsu. 1985. Emphatic Words and Structures in Biblical Hebrew. Jerusalem: Magnes. ↗
  140. Narrog, Heiko and Shinya Ito. 2007. “Re-Constructing Semantic Maps: The Comitative– Instrumental Area.” Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 60: 273-292. ↗
  141. Newmeyer, Frederick J. 2007. “Linguistic Typology Requires Crosslinguistic Formal Categories.” Linguistic Typology 11: 133-157. ↗
  142. Newmeyer, Frederick J. 2010. “On Comparative Concepts and Descriptive Categories: A Reply to Haspelmath.” Language 86: 688-695. ↗
  143. Nunberg, Geoffrey. 1993. “Indexicality and Deixis.” Linguistics and Philosophy 16: 1-43. find
  144. Pardee, Dennis. 2007. “Ugaritic Morphology.” Pages 49-74 in Morphologies of Asia and Africa, vol 1. Edited by Alan S. Kaye. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. find
  145. Pat-El, Na’ama. 2004-2007. “Some Notes on the Syntax of Biblical Hebrew zeh.” Zeitschrift für Althebraistik 17-20: 150-158. find
  146. Pat-El, Na’ama and Alexander Treiger. 2008. “On Adnominalization of Prepositional Phrases and Adverbs in Semitic.” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 158: 265-283. find
  147. Pennacchietti, Fabrizio A. 1968. Studi sui pronomi determinativi semitici. Pubblicazioni del Seminario di semitistica 4. Napoli: Istituto orientale di Napoli. find
  148. Pennacchietti, Fabrizio A. 1980. “‘Sono già due anni che nel paese c’è la carestia’ (Gen. XLV, 6): I sintagmi temporali ebraici introdotti dal pronome ze e la loro traduzione in Siriaco, Arabo ed Etiopico.” Vicino Oriente 3: 225-242. find
  149. Perkins, Revere D. 1992. Deixis, Grammar, and Culture. Typological Studies in Language 24. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ↗
  150. Rainey, Anson F. and R. Steven Notley. 2006. The Sacred Bridge: Carta’s Atlas of the Biblical World. Jerusalem: Carta. find
  151. Rauh, Gisa, ed. 1983. Essays on Deixis. Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 188. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. find
  152. Rendsburg, Gary A. 1990. Linguistic Evidence for the Northern Origin of Selected Psalms. Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 43. Atlanta: Scholars. find
  153. Rendsburg, Gary A. 2007. “Ancient Hebrew Morphology.” Pages 85-105 in Morphologies of Asia and Africa, vol 1. Edited by Alan S. Kaye. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. ↗
  154. Rubin, Aaron D. 2005. Studies in Semitic Grammaticalization. Harvard Semitic Studies 57. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. ↗
  155. Rubio, Gonzalo. 2007. “Sumerian Morphology.” Pages 1327-1379 in Morphologies of Asia and Africa, vol 2. Edited by Alan S. Kaye. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. find
  156. Seow, Choon-Leong. 1995. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew: Revised Edition. Nashville: Abingdon. find
  157. Stassen, Leon. 1997. Intransitive Predication. Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clarendon. find
  158. Stirling, Lesley and Rodney Huddleston. 2002. “Deixis and Anaphora.” Pages 1449-1564 in The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Edited by Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ↗ our card
  159. van der Auwera, Johan and Andrej Malchukov. 2005. “A Semantic Map for Depictive Adjectivals.” Pages 393-421 in Secondary Predication and Adverbial Modification: The Typology of Depictives. Edited by Nikolaus P. Himmelmann and Eva Schultze-Berndt. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ↗
  160. van der Merwe, Christo H. J., Jackie A. Naudé, and Jan H. Kroeze. 1999. A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar. Biblical Languages: Hebrew 3. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. find
  161. van Hoek, Karen. 1997. Anaphora and Conceptual Structure. Cognitive Theory of Language and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. find
  162. Vanoni, Gottfried. 1984. Literarkritik und Grammatik: Untersuchung der Wiederholungen und Spannungen in 1 Kön 11–12. Arbeiten zu Text und Sprache im Alten Testament 21. St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag. find
  163. Wagner, Andreas. 1997. Sprechakte und Sprechaktanalyse im Alten Testament: Untersuchungen im biblischen Hebräisch an der Nahtstelle zwischen Handlungsebene und Grammatik. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 253. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. find
  164. Walker-Jones, Arthur. 2003. Hebrew for Biblical Interpretation. Resources for Biblical Study 48. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature. find
  165. Waltke, Bruce K. and M. O’Connor. 1990. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. find
  166. Webber, Bonnie L. 1988. “Discourse Deixis: Reference to Discourse Segments.” Pages 113-122 in Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics. New York: Association for Computational Linguistics. find
  167. Weissenborn, Jürgen and Wolfgang Klein, eds. 1982. Here and There: Cross-Linguistic Studies on Deixis and Demonstration. Pragmatics & Beyond III:2/3. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. find
  168. Woods, Christopher E. 2001a. “The Deictic Foundations of the Sumerian Language.” PhD diss., Harvard University. find
  169. Woods, Christopher E. 2001b. “Deixis, Person, and Case in Sumerian.” Acta Sumerologica 22: 303-334. find
  170. Young, Ian. 2003. “Concluding Reflections.” Pages 312-317 in Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology. Edited by Ian Young. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 369. London: T & T Clark. find
  171. Young, Ian. 2005. “The Biblical Scrolls from Qumran and the Masoretic Text: A Statistical Approach.” Pages 81-139 in Feasts and Fasts: A Festschrift in Honour of Alan David Crown. Edited by Marianne Dacy, Jennifer Dowling, and Suzanne Faigan. Mandelbaum Studies in Judaica 11. Sydney: Mandelbaum. find
  172. Young, Ian, Robert Rezetko, and Martin Ehrensvärd. 2008. Linguistic Dating of Biblical Texts. 2 vols. London: Equinox. find

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo-2014-kummerow-anaphora-deixis-tiberian-hebrew-semantically/