Mova0.5 pre-release⌕
☰
home / docs / papers / Ancient Hebrew / The contribution of Qumran to historical Hebrew linguistics: Evidence from the syntax of participial negation

The contribution of Qumran to historical Hebrew linguistics: Evidence from the syntax of participial negation

What it is about

Qumran Hebrew sits between Biblical and Mishnaic Hebrew; the authors use the negation of the participle to show it is a distinct stage. The participle is half noun, half verb, so it can be negated by אֵין (the nominal negator) or by לֹא (the verbal one), and the two differ in syntax, not just style. With אֵין: (a) אֵין + pronominal suffix as subject + participle (אֵינֶנּוּ …), sentence negation; (b) אֵין + noun subject + participle; (c) אֵין + participle with no overt subject ("there is no one who saves", וְאֵין מוֹשִׁיעַ), which negates only the empty subject (constituent negation). With לֹא: negation of a single constituent, placed right before it ("not tall and not short"), which אֵין never does; and, growing at Qumran, sentence negation of a participial (often passive) predicate with verb–subject order and, newly, no overt subject — the participle starting to behave like a finite verb (pro-drop), heading towards Mishnaic usage. They answer Geiger's claim that אֵין and לֹא are functionally the same: "לֹא נָכוֹן" (Exod 8:22) is a full predication, while "לְאֵין נָכוֹן לוֹ" (Neh 8:10) is a nominal, possessive use.

Ideas

For Mova

I1 belongs in Syntax: the clause and the sentence (negation) and in the head rules of tools/macula (where advmod of לֹא attaches) and the polarity column of tools/macula/src/prag.rs (the neg-polarity rule). I2 is for 05-pronouns-particles.md (negatives) and the Torah dictionary's entry for אֵין. I3 and I4 go into 11-mishnaic.md and 12-biblical-mishnaic-modern.md (the participle-present).

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.4102/hts.v72i4.3150

@article{naude2016contribution,
  title = {{The contribution of Qumran to historical Hebrew linguistics: Evidence from the syntax of participial negation}},
  author = {Naudé, Jacobus A. and Miller-Naudé, Cynthia L.},
  journal = {HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies},
  year = {2016},
  doi = {10.4102/hts.v72i4.3150},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v72i4.3150}
}

References

77 references, 0 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Andersen, F.A. & Forbes, A.D., 2007, ‘The participle in Biblical Hebrew and the overlap of grammar and lexicon’, in S. Maleno & D. Miano (eds.), Milk and honey: Essays on ancient Israel and Bible in appreciation of the Judaic Studies Program at the University of California, San Diego, pp. 185–212, Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, IN. find
  2. Andrason, A., 2013, ‘Qotel and its dynamics (part 1)’, Folia Orientalia 50, 83–113. find
  3. Andrason, A., 2014, ‘Qotel and its dynamics (part 2)’, Folia Orientalia 51, 139–153. find
  4. Baillet, M., Milik, J.T. & De Vaux, R., 1962, Les `Petits Grottes’ de Qumran, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan 3, Clarendon Press, Oxford. find
  5. Bar-Asher, M., 2000, ‘A few remarks on Mishnaic Hebrew and Aramaic in Qumran Hebrew’, in T. Muraoka & J.F. Elwolde (eds.), Diggers at the well. Proceedings of a Third International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, pp. 12–19, Brill, Leiden. find
  6. Bendavid, A., 1967, Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew, Hebrew University, Tel Aviv. [in Hebrew]. find
  7. Blau, J., 2000, ‘A conservative view of the language of the Dead Sea Scrolls’, in T. Muraoka & J.F. Elwolde (eds.), Diggers at the well. Proceedings of a Third International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, pp. 20–25, Brill, Leiden. find
  8. Kutscher, E.Y., 1982, A history of the Hebrew language, Brill, Leiden. find
  9. Leahy, T., 1960, ‘Studies in the syntax of 1QS’, Biblica 41, 135–157. find
  10. Milik, J.T., 1962, ‘Le rouleau de cuivre provenant de la grotte 3Q (3Q15). Commentaire et texte’, in M. Baillet, J.T. Milik & R. de Vaux (eds), Les ‘petites grottes’ de Qumran, pp. 211–302, Discoveries in the Judean Desert 3, Clarendon, Oxford. find
  11. Miller-Naudé, C.L. & Naudé, J.A., 2015, ‘Negation and the participle in Biblical Hebrew’, Kleine Untersuchungen zur Sprache des Alten Testaments und seiner Umwelt 19, 165–199. find
  12. Miller-Naudé, C.L. & Zevit, Z., 2012, Diachrony in Biblical Hebrew, Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, IN. find
  13. Morag, S., 1988, ‘Qumran Hebrew: Some typological observations’, Vetus Testamentum 8, 148–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156853388X00355 ↗
  14. Muchowski, P., 1994, ‘Language of the Copper Scroll in the light of the phrases denoting the directions of the world’, in M.O. Wise, J.J. Collins & D.G. Pardee (eds.), Methods of investigation of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Qumran site. Present realities and future prospects, pp. 319–327, The New York Academy of Sciences, New York. find
  15. Muraoka, T., 2000, ‘An approach to the morphosyntax and syntax of Qumran Hebrew’, in T. Muraoka & J.F. Elwolde (eds.), Diggers at the well. Proceedings of a third international symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, pp. 193–214, Brill, Leiden. find
  16. Naudé, J.A., 1990, ‘A syntactic analysis of dislocations in Biblical Hebrew’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 16, 115–130. find
  17. Naudé, J.A., 1994a, ‘Towards a typology of Qumran Hebrew’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 20(2), 65–83. find
  18. Cook, E.M., 1992, ‘Qumran Aramaic and Aramaic dialectology’, in T. Muraoka (ed.), Studies in Qumran Aramaic, pp. 1–24, Peeters, Louvain. (Abr-Nahrain Supplement 3.) find
  19. Naudé, J.A., 1994b, ‘The asymmetry of subject pronouns and subject nouns in Qumran Hebrew and cognates’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 20, 139–164. find
  20. Davies, P., 2003, ‘Biblical Hebrew and the history of ancient Judah’, in I. Young (ed.), Biblical Hebrew: Studies in chronology and typology, pp. 150–163, T & T Clark, London. find
  21. Naudé, J.A., 1996, ‘Independent personal pronouns in Qumran Hebrew syntax. A minimalist approach’, D.Litt thesis, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein. find
  22. Dyk, J.W., 1994, ‘Participles in context: A computer-assisted study of Old Testament Hebrew’, PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit. find
  23. Ehrensvärd, M., 2003, ‘Linguistic dating of biblical texts’, in I. Young (ed.), Biblical Hebrew: Studies in chronology and typology, pp. 164–188, T & T Clark, London. find
  24. Fitzmyer, J.A., 1979, A wandering Aramean: Collected Aramaic essays, Scholars Press, Missoula, MT. find
  25. Naudé, J.A., 2000a, ‘Diachronic syntax and language change: The case of Qumran Hebrew’, Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 18, 1–14. find
  26. Naudé, J.A., 2000b, ‘Qumran Hebrew syntax in the perspective of a theory of language change and diffusion’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 26(1), 105–132. find
  27. Naudé, J.A., 2000c, ‘The language of the Book of Ezekiel. Biblical Hebrew in transition?’ Old Testament Essays 13(1), 46–71. find
  28. García-Martínez, F. & Tigchelaar, E.J.C., 1997, The Dead Sea Scrolls study edition, 2 vols., Brill, Leiden. find
  29. Naudé, J.A., 2003, ‘The transitions of Biblical Hebrew in the perspective of language change and diffusion’, in I Young (ed.), Biblical Hebrew: Studies in chronology and typology, pp. 150–163, T & T Clark, London. find
  30. Garr, W.R., 1985, Dialect geography of Syria-Palestine, 1000–586 BCE, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, PA. find
  31. Naudé, J.A., 2010, ‘Linguistic dating of Biblical Hebrew texts: The chronology and typology debate’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 36(2), 1–22. find
  32. Geiger, G., 2012, Das hebräische Partizip in den Texten aus der judäischen Wüste, Brill, Leiden. (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 101.) find
  33. Naudé, J.A., 2012, ‘Diachrony in Biblical Hebrew and a theory of language change and diffusion’, in C.L. Miller-Naudé & Z. Zevit (eds.), Diachrony in Biblical Hebrew, pp. 61–82, Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, IN. find
  34. Goodspeed, E., 1944, ‘The original language of the Gospels’, in T.S. Kepler (ed.), Contemporary thinking about Jesus: An anthology, pp. 58–63, Abingdon-Cokesbury, New York. find
  35. Goshen-Gottstein, M.H., 1958, ‘Linguistic structure and tradition in the Qumran documents’, Scripta Hierosolymitana 4, 101–137. find
  36. Holmstedt, R.D., 2009, ‘Word order and information structure in Ruth and Jonah: A generative typological analysis, Journal of Semitic Studies 54, 111-139. find
  37. Naudé, J.A. & Rendsburg, G.A., 2013, ‘Negation: Pre-Modern Hebrew’, in G. Khan (ed.), Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, 2 pp. 801–811, Brill, Leiden. find
  38. Parry, D.W. & Tov, E. (eds.), 2014, The Dead Sea Scrolls reader, 2nd ed., 2 vols., Brill, Leiden. find
  39. Polzin, R., 1976, Late Biblical Hebrew: Toward an historical typology of Biblical Hebrew prose, Scholars Press, Missoula, MT. find
  40. Qimron, E., 1986, The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Scholars Press, Atlanta, GA. find
  41. Holmstedt, R.D., 2014, ‘Critical at the margins: Edge constituents in Biblical Hebrew’, Kleine Untersuchungen zur Sprache des Alten Testaments und seiner Umwelt 17, 109–156. find
  42. Qimron, E., 1992, ‘Observations on the history of Early Hebrew (1000 B.C.E.–200 C.E.) in the light of the Dead Sea documents’, in D. Dimant & U. Rappaport (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls. Forty years of research, pp. 349–361, Brill, Leiden. find
  43. Hurvitz, A., 1965, ‘Observations on the language of the third apocryphal Psalm from Qumran’, Revue de Qumran 5(2), 225–232. find
  44. Qimron, E., 2000, ‘The nature of DSS Hebrew and its relation to BH and MH’, in T. Muraoka & J.F. Elwolde (eds.), Diggers at the well. Proceedings of a Third International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, pp. 232–244, Brill, Leiden. find
  45. Hurvitz, A., 1972, The transition period in Biblical Hebrew: A study in post-exilic Hebrew and its implications for the dating of the Psalms, Bialik Institute, Jerusalem. find
  46. Hurvitz, A., 1973, ‘Linguistic criteria for dating problematic biblical texts’, Hebrew Abstracts 14, 74–79. find
  47. Hurvitz, A., 1974, ‘The evidence of language in dating the Priestly Code: A linguistic study in technical idioms and terminology’, Revue Biblique 81, 24–56. find
  48. Hurvitz, A., 1982, A linguistic study of the relationship between the Priestly Source and the Book of Ezekiel. A new approach to an old problem, Gabalda, Paris. find
  49. Hurvitz, A., 2000, ‘Was QH a “spoken” language? On some recent views and positions: Comments’, in T. Muraoka & J.F. Elwolde (eds.), Diggers at the well. Proceedings of a Third International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, pp. 110–114, Brill, Leiden. find
  50. Hurvitz, A., 2006, ‘The recent debate on Late Biblical Hebrew: Solid data, experts’ opinions, and inconclusive arguments’, Hebrew Studies 47, 191–210. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1353/hbr.2006.0005 ↗
  51. Joosten, J., 2000, ‘The knowledge and use of Hebrew in the Hellenistic Period: Qumran and the Septuagint’, in T. Muraoka & J.F. Elwolde (eds.), Diggers at the well. Proceedings of a Third International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, pp. 115–130, Brill, Leiden. find
  52. Joosten, J., 2010, ‘Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek in the Qumran Scrolls’, in T.H. Lim & J.J. Collins (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 351–374, Oxford University Press, Oxford. find
  53. Qimron, E. & Strugnell, J., 1994, Qumran Cave 4. V, Clarendon Press, Oxford. (Discoveries in the Judean Desert 10.) find
  54. Rabin, C., 1965, ‘Qumran Hebrew: Some typological observations’, Scripta Hierosolymitana 4, 144–161. find
  55. Reymond, E.D., 2014, Qumran Hebrew. An overview of orthography, phonology, and morphology, SBL Press, Atlanta, GA. find
  56. Rezetko, R., 2003, ‘Dating Biblical Hebrew: Evidence from Samuel-Kings and Chronicles’, in I. Young (ed.), Biblical Hebrew: Studies in chronology and typology, pp. 215–250, T & T Clark, London. find
  57. Rezetko, R. & Young, I., 2014, Historical linguistics and Biblical Hebrew. Steps toward an integrated approach, SBL Press, Atlanta, GA. find
  58. Sáenz-Badillos, A., 1993, A history of the Hebrew language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. find
  59. Schniedewind, W.M., 2013, A social history of Hebrew. Its origins through the Rabbinic Period, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. find
  60. Schorch, S., 2008, ‘Spoken Hebrew of the Late Second temple Period according to oral and written Samaritan tradition’, in J. Joosten & J.S. Rey (eds.), Conservatism and innovation in the Hebrew language of the Hellenistic period. Proceedings of a Fourth International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, pp. 175–192, Brill, Leiden. Page 10 of 10 find
  61. Segal, M.H., 1970, A grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew, Clarendon Press, Oxford. find
  62. Sharvit, S., 1967, ‘Investigations concerning the lexicon of the Copper Scroll’, Beth Mikra 31, 127–135. [in Hebrew]. find
  63. Smith, M.S., 1991a, The origins and development of the Waw-Consecutive: Northwest Semitic evidence from Ugarit to Qumran, Scholars Press, Atlanta, GA. find
  64. Smith, M.S., 1991b, ‘Converted and unconverted perfect and imperfect forms in the literature of Qumran’, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 284, 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1357189 ↗
  65. Tov, E., 2004, Scribal practices and approaches reflected in the texts found in the Judean Desert, SBL Press, Atlanta, GA. find
  66. Ulrich, E., Skehan, P. & Sanderson, J., 1995, Qumran Cave 4: IV Paleo-Hebrew and Greek Biblical Manuscripts, Clarendon Press, Oxford. (Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 9.) find
  67. Van Peursen, W.Th., 1999, ‘The verbal system in the Hebrew text of Ben Sira’, Ph.D thesis, University of Leiden. find
  68. Waltke, B.K. & O’Connor, M., 1990, An introduction to Biblical Hebrew syntax, Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, IN. find
  69. Smith, M.S., 1991c, ‘The Waw-Consecutive at Qumran’, Zeitschrift für Althebraistik 3, 161–164. find
  70. Wolters, A., 1990, ‘The Copper Scroll and the vocabulary of Mishnaic Hebrew’, Revue de Qumran 55/14, 483–495. find
  71. Snyman, F.P.J., 2004, The scope of the negative lōʾ in Biblical Hebrew, Acta Academica Supplementum 3, UFS-SASOL Library, Bloemfontein. find
  72. Young, I., 1993, Diversity in Pre-Exilic Hebrew, J.C.B. Mohr, Tübingen. find
  73. Snyman, F.P.J. & Naudé, J.A., 2003, ‘Sentence and constituent negation in Biblical Hebrew’, Journal for Semitics 12, 237–267. find
  74. Talshir, D., 2003, ‘The habitat and history of Hebrew during the Second Temple Period’, in I. Young (ed.), Biblical Hebrew: Studies in chronology and typology, pp. 215–275, T & T Clark London. find
  75. Young, I. (ed.), 2003a, ‘Biblical Hebrew: Studies in chronology and typology, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement 369, T & T Clark, London. find
  76. Young, I., 2003b, ‘Concluding reflections’, in I. Young (ed.), Biblical Hebrew: Studies in chronology and typology, 312–317, T & T Clark, London. find
  77. Young, I, Rezetko, R. & Ehrensvärd, M., 2008, The linguistic dating of biblical texts, Equinox, London. find

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo-2016-naude-contribution-qumran-historical-hebrew-linguistics/