As is well-known, many Jews during the Jewish Enlightenment era were influenced by the scientific... more As is well-known, many Jews during the Jewish Enlightenment era were influenced by the scientific and cultural activity of the surrounding societies, and in many cases the writings authored for the Jewish public were inspired by it. This paper examines the realization of this inspiration in the field of Hebrew linguistics. Judah Leib Ben-Zeʾev, a prominent figure at the beginnings of the Jewish enlightenment and its greatest grammarian, based his linguistic work, to a large extent, on adaptation and adjustment of the grammar of German, as presented in German grammar guides of the time, to Hebrew. The description of the tense-modus system in Ben-Zeʾev’s work, accurately reflecting the German categorization and terminology, is a distinctive example of this process.
One of the most prominent trends among Jewish scholars during the Haskalah (Jewish Enlightenment)... more One of the most prominent trends among Jewish scholars during the Haskalah (Jewish Enlightenment) era was the aspiration to find and determine differences in the meanings and uses of Hebrew synonyms. This trend developed parallel to German scholars’ occupation with discriminating synonymy – differentiating German synonyms – which had reached its apogee at that time and was most likely the main source of inspiration for the Jewish trend. This inspiration is clearly reflected in R. Solomon Pappenheim’s lexicon of Hebrew synonyms, Yeri̔oth Shlomo, which shows several rather strong affinities with the main German dictionary of synonyms of its time, Johann Ernst Stosch’s lexicon. Pappenheim’s familiarity with German linguistics is probably reflected also in his original theory of Hebrew roots, which underlies the etymological-semantic discussions in Yeri̔oth Shlomo. The Jewish occupation with synonyms during the Haskalah era in general, and Pappenheim’s linguistic methodology in particular, are therefore manifestations of German cultural influence on contemporaneous Jewish scholars.
This paper examines remnants of a group of unique Tanhuma-Yelammedenu (TY) editions preserved in ... more This paper examines remnants of a group of unique Tanhuma-Yelammedenu (TY) editions preserved in Cairo Genizah fragments. These editions introduce a consistent stylistic marker that is very rare in rabbinic literature – the use of the divine name האלוהים. From the linguistic aspect, their Hebrew contains many features which are usually considered authentic distinctive Palestinian rabbinic characteristics. A comparison between the language of these editions and the language of the known TY editions (especially the "standard" printed edition and Solomon Buber's edition) reveals a clear distinction between the two corpora and demonstrates that the Palestinian linguistic features were considerably blurred in the known editions. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the unknown editions preserve the language and style which were in use during the initial emergence of TY literature in the Land of Israel, while the Hebrew of the standard TY editions reflects their later editing in other places.
It is commonly assumed that the distinction between Dagesh forte (marking a geminated consonant) ... more It is commonly assumed that the distinction between Dagesh forte (marking a geminated consonant) and Dagesh lene (marking a plosive, non-geminated pronunciation of בגדכפת letters), was also extant in the original Tiberian reading tradition. But the use of only one sign for both entities in the Tiberian vocalization, as well as a few findings from Tiberian-related sources, lead to the conclusion that the two types of Dagesh were both realized with gemination in the Tiberian tradition. By contrast, there are texts with Babylonian and Palestinian vocalization which make a distinction between the two types, probably representing a distinction in their realization. These facts suggest that this distinction, which is an integral component of the standard Hebrew grammar and is maintained in many oral traditions, is not based on the Tiberian tradition, preserved only in non-Tiberian traditions.
This paper examines the history of the term "Dagesh le-Tif'eret ha-Kri'a", which is rooted in ear... more This paper examines the history of the term "Dagesh le-Tif'eret ha-Kri'a", which is rooted in early medieval Hebrew grammars and continues until modern times. It begins with the Arabic term "Tafkhim" (glory, "Pe'ur" in Hebrew), which Sa'adia Gaon and other early middle eastern grammarians employed to describe augmentation of words, and R. Jonah ibn Janaḥ used to explain some certain vowel changes. The Kinḥis, R. Joseph and especially his son, R. David, presented a reformed term – "Tif'eret" – and besides its previous meaning, they used it in respect to exceptional occurrences of Dagesh (as in מִקְּדָשׁ [Exod. 15:17], חָדֵלּוּּ [Judg. 5:7]), which could not be explained as one of the regular known functions of Dagesh. This term continued to serve more or less in this sense later on in Hebrew grammars. But in some modern Hebrew grammars it is used in a narrower sense, referring only to a certain type of Dagesh, which appears in a few particles like לָמָּה, אֵלֶּה, etc. This was the last station in the winding course of this term's meanings, which is essentially different from its beginnings.
New Perspectives in Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew, 2021
This paper examines some attitudes towards the nature, merit, and use of Rabbinic Hebrew that pre... more This paper examines some attitudes towards the nature, merit, and use of Rabbinic Hebrew that prevailed among the Jewish intelligentsia during the Jewish Enlightenment, as reflected in three Biblical Hebrew grammars: Chayim Keslin's (1749–1832) Maslul be-Diqduq Leshon ha-Qodesh (Berlin, 1788), Judah Leib Ben-Zeʾev's (1764–1811) Talmud Lashon ʿIvri (Breslau, 1796), and Chayim Zvi Lerner’s (1815–1889) Moreh ha-Lashon (Leipzig, 1859). These works differ from one another in terms of frequency and nature of data from Rabbinic Hebrew included in their grammatical discussions. It is being argued that the status of Rabbinic Hebrew in each work reflects the author’s attitude towards the desirable status of Rabbinic Hebrew in Hebrew usage of contemporary Jewish society.
This essay offers an initial examination of the influence of German grammatical theory on Hebrew ... more This essay offers an initial examination of the influence of German grammatical theory on Hebrew grammatical works at the beginning of the Jewish Enlightenment (late eighteenth century). The examination is based on the terminology and description of one issue – Hebrew pronouns – as presented in two main works: Moses Medelssohn's (1729-1786) booklet Or Lintivah (Berlin, 1783) and the comprehensive grammar of Judah Leib Ben-Ze’ev (1764-1811) – Talmud Lashon ‛Ivri (Breslau, 1796). The paper reveals the German sources of these two scholars and analyzes the manner in which the sources were used. This analysis paints a picture of their careful and selective adaptation of the German model, while at the same time illustrating the manner in which they perceived Hebrew grammatical elements through German features. This approach has left its imprint on Hebrew grammar to this day.
This article presents an analysis of the controversy between two 18th leading figures: R. Zalman ... more This article presents an analysis of the controversy between two 18th leading figures: R. Zalman Hanau and R. Jacob Emden. The stances expressed in this controversy, which was held over changes in the traditional prayer versions suggested by Hanau, reveal opposing fundamental attitudes of the two rivals towards basic questions concerning the origin of Hebrew and its linguistic essence. It is being suggested that this controversy resembles the ancient linguistic dispute between the analogist school and anomalist school in Greek and Latin Linguistics, even though these two 18th figures were not familiar with it.
Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft, 2020
This paper offers an examination of the various linguistic sources of the prominent Jewish gramma... more This paper offers an examination of the various linguistic sources of the prominent Jewish grammarian of the Jewish Enlightenment – Judah Leib Ben-Zeʿev (1764-1811). It turns out that besides former Jewish grammars, he used various sources of Christian Hebraism and German linguistics of the time, to which he never explicitly referred. Thanks to his acquaintance with these sources he succeeded in expanding the scope of Jewish Hebrew grammar to a large extent. A close investigation of his grammatical descriptions reveals that in some cases, his descriptions were heavily modeled by German linguistics, while parallel presentations of those topics in Jewish or Christian Hebrew grammars seem to be more adequate. It is being suggested that the grounds for his preference of German linguistic sources lay on the common cultural attitude among Jewish scholars of the time towards the contemporary situation of Hebrew.
This article introduces one of the basic principles of the grammatical theory of the eighteenth-c... more This article introduces one of the basic principles of the grammatical theory of the eighteenth-century Hebrew grammarian Rabbi Zalman Hena (Hanau). Hena believed that the Hebrew language was divinely planned and created and was governed by divinely set grammatical rules. Hena therefore tried to address the challenge of minimizing exceptions to the rules. He assumed that a deeper investigation of the Hebrew language would reveal a set of secondary rules, which would complement the existing primary rules and cover most of the exceptions. This attitude led Hena to introduce many grammatical innovations. This study describes and examines how Hena applied this principle to his innovative view of the length of the Hebrew vowels and the structure of the Hebrew syllables. This examination includes Hena’s most famous, influential innovation: the notion of the "light vowel" (התנועה הקלה), which later produced the term "floating shewa" (שווא מרחף).
This paper deals with the traditional distinction between verbs and nouns, in which any verbal fo... more This paper deals with the traditional distinction between verbs and nouns, in which any verbal form is assigned to one of the seven constant verbal patterns (binyanim), while a nominal form might be assigned to various basic patterns which differ according to its root class (gizrah). It is being suggested that this distiction, which is customarily applied in Hebrew grammars since the Middle Ages, is derived from an abstract implicit concept of the notion of the morpheme, which could be deduced from the stances expressed in the traditional discussion on the number of the Hebrew verbal patterns. Given that there is a fundmental semantic difference between the verbal system and the nominal system, this concept of the morpheme, based also on the semantic profile of a given word, entailed the distinction between verbs and nouns.
As is well-known, many Jews during the Jewish Enlightenment era were influenced by the scientific... more As is well-known, many Jews during the Jewish Enlightenment era were influenced by the scientific and cultural activity of the surrounding societies, and in many cases the writings authored for the Jewish public were inspired by it. This paper examines the realization of this inspiration in the field of Hebrew linguistics. Judah Leib Ben-Zeʾev, a prominent figure at the beginnings of the Jewish enlightenment and its greatest grammarian, based his linguistic work, to a large extent, on adaptation and adjustment of the grammar of German, as presented in German grammar guides of the time, to Hebrew. The description of the tense-modus system in Ben-Zeʾev’s work, accurately reflecting the German categorization and terminology, is a distinctive example of this process.
One of the most prominent trends among Jewish scholars during the Haskalah (Jewish Enlightenment)... more One of the most prominent trends among Jewish scholars during the Haskalah (Jewish Enlightenment) era was the aspiration to find and determine differences in the meanings and uses of Hebrew synonyms. This trend developed parallel to German scholars’ occupation with discriminating synonymy – differentiating German synonyms – which had reached its apogee at that time and was most likely the main source of inspiration for the Jewish trend. This inspiration is clearly reflected in R. Solomon Pappenheim’s lexicon of Hebrew synonyms, Yeri̔oth Shlomo, which shows several rather strong affinities with the main German dictionary of synonyms of its time, Johann Ernst Stosch’s lexicon. Pappenheim’s familiarity with German linguistics is probably reflected also in his original theory of Hebrew roots, which underlies the etymological-semantic discussions in Yeri̔oth Shlomo. The Jewish occupation with synonyms during the Haskalah era in general, and Pappenheim’s linguistic methodology in particular, are therefore manifestations of German cultural influence on contemporaneous Jewish scholars.
This paper examines remnants of a group of unique Tanhuma-Yelammedenu (TY) editions preserved in ... more This paper examines remnants of a group of unique Tanhuma-Yelammedenu (TY) editions preserved in Cairo Genizah fragments. These editions introduce a consistent stylistic marker that is very rare in rabbinic literature – the use of the divine name האלוהים. From the linguistic aspect, their Hebrew contains many features which are usually considered authentic distinctive Palestinian rabbinic characteristics. A comparison between the language of these editions and the language of the known TY editions (especially the "standard" printed edition and Solomon Buber's edition) reveals a clear distinction between the two corpora and demonstrates that the Palestinian linguistic features were considerably blurred in the known editions. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the unknown editions preserve the language and style which were in use during the initial emergence of TY literature in the Land of Israel, while the Hebrew of the standard TY editions reflects their later editing in other places.
It is commonly assumed that the distinction between Dagesh forte (marking a geminated consonant) ... more It is commonly assumed that the distinction between Dagesh forte (marking a geminated consonant) and Dagesh lene (marking a plosive, non-geminated pronunciation of בגדכפת letters), was also extant in the original Tiberian reading tradition. But the use of only one sign for both entities in the Tiberian vocalization, as well as a few findings from Tiberian-related sources, lead to the conclusion that the two types of Dagesh were both realized with gemination in the Tiberian tradition. By contrast, there are texts with Babylonian and Palestinian vocalization which make a distinction between the two types, probably representing a distinction in their realization. These facts suggest that this distinction, which is an integral component of the standard Hebrew grammar and is maintained in many oral traditions, is not based on the Tiberian tradition, preserved only in non-Tiberian traditions.
This paper examines the history of the term "Dagesh le-Tif'eret ha-Kri'a", which is rooted in ear... more This paper examines the history of the term "Dagesh le-Tif'eret ha-Kri'a", which is rooted in early medieval Hebrew grammars and continues until modern times. It begins with the Arabic term "Tafkhim" (glory, "Pe'ur" in Hebrew), which Sa'adia Gaon and other early middle eastern grammarians employed to describe augmentation of words, and R. Jonah ibn Janaḥ used to explain some certain vowel changes. The Kinḥis, R. Joseph and especially his son, R. David, presented a reformed term – "Tif'eret" – and besides its previous meaning, they used it in respect to exceptional occurrences of Dagesh (as in מִקְּדָשׁ [Exod. 15:17], חָדֵלּוּּ [Judg. 5:7]), which could not be explained as one of the regular known functions of Dagesh. This term continued to serve more or less in this sense later on in Hebrew grammars. But in some modern Hebrew grammars it is used in a narrower sense, referring only to a certain type of Dagesh, which appears in a few particles like לָמָּה, אֵלֶּה, etc. This was the last station in the winding course of this term's meanings, which is essentially different from its beginnings.
New Perspectives in Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew, 2021
This paper examines some attitudes towards the nature, merit, and use of Rabbinic Hebrew that pre... more This paper examines some attitudes towards the nature, merit, and use of Rabbinic Hebrew that prevailed among the Jewish intelligentsia during the Jewish Enlightenment, as reflected in three Biblical Hebrew grammars: Chayim Keslin's (1749–1832) Maslul be-Diqduq Leshon ha-Qodesh (Berlin, 1788), Judah Leib Ben-Zeʾev's (1764–1811) Talmud Lashon ʿIvri (Breslau, 1796), and Chayim Zvi Lerner’s (1815–1889) Moreh ha-Lashon (Leipzig, 1859). These works differ from one another in terms of frequency and nature of data from Rabbinic Hebrew included in their grammatical discussions. It is being argued that the status of Rabbinic Hebrew in each work reflects the author’s attitude towards the desirable status of Rabbinic Hebrew in Hebrew usage of contemporary Jewish society.
This essay offers an initial examination of the influence of German grammatical theory on Hebrew ... more This essay offers an initial examination of the influence of German grammatical theory on Hebrew grammatical works at the beginning of the Jewish Enlightenment (late eighteenth century). The examination is based on the terminology and description of one issue – Hebrew pronouns – as presented in two main works: Moses Medelssohn's (1729-1786) booklet Or Lintivah (Berlin, 1783) and the comprehensive grammar of Judah Leib Ben-Ze’ev (1764-1811) – Talmud Lashon ‛Ivri (Breslau, 1796). The paper reveals the German sources of these two scholars and analyzes the manner in which the sources were used. This analysis paints a picture of their careful and selective adaptation of the German model, while at the same time illustrating the manner in which they perceived Hebrew grammatical elements through German features. This approach has left its imprint on Hebrew grammar to this day.
This article presents an analysis of the controversy between two 18th leading figures: R. Zalman ... more This article presents an analysis of the controversy between two 18th leading figures: R. Zalman Hanau and R. Jacob Emden. The stances expressed in this controversy, which was held over changes in the traditional prayer versions suggested by Hanau, reveal opposing fundamental attitudes of the two rivals towards basic questions concerning the origin of Hebrew and its linguistic essence. It is being suggested that this controversy resembles the ancient linguistic dispute between the analogist school and anomalist school in Greek and Latin Linguistics, even though these two 18th figures were not familiar with it.
Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft, 2020
This paper offers an examination of the various linguistic sources of the prominent Jewish gramma... more This paper offers an examination of the various linguistic sources of the prominent Jewish grammarian of the Jewish Enlightenment – Judah Leib Ben-Zeʿev (1764-1811). It turns out that besides former Jewish grammars, he used various sources of Christian Hebraism and German linguistics of the time, to which he never explicitly referred. Thanks to his acquaintance with these sources he succeeded in expanding the scope of Jewish Hebrew grammar to a large extent. A close investigation of his grammatical descriptions reveals that in some cases, his descriptions were heavily modeled by German linguistics, while parallel presentations of those topics in Jewish or Christian Hebrew grammars seem to be more adequate. It is being suggested that the grounds for his preference of German linguistic sources lay on the common cultural attitude among Jewish scholars of the time towards the contemporary situation of Hebrew.
This article introduces one of the basic principles of the grammatical theory of the eighteenth-c... more This article introduces one of the basic principles of the grammatical theory of the eighteenth-century Hebrew grammarian Rabbi Zalman Hena (Hanau). Hena believed that the Hebrew language was divinely planned and created and was governed by divinely set grammatical rules. Hena therefore tried to address the challenge of minimizing exceptions to the rules. He assumed that a deeper investigation of the Hebrew language would reveal a set of secondary rules, which would complement the existing primary rules and cover most of the exceptions. This attitude led Hena to introduce many grammatical innovations. This study describes and examines how Hena applied this principle to his innovative view of the length of the Hebrew vowels and the structure of the Hebrew syllables. This examination includes Hena’s most famous, influential innovation: the notion of the "light vowel" (התנועה הקלה), which later produced the term "floating shewa" (שווא מרחף).
This paper deals with the traditional distinction between verbs and nouns, in which any verbal fo... more This paper deals with the traditional distinction between verbs and nouns, in which any verbal form is assigned to one of the seven constant verbal patterns (binyanim), while a nominal form might be assigned to various basic patterns which differ according to its root class (gizrah). It is being suggested that this distiction, which is customarily applied in Hebrew grammars since the Middle Ages, is derived from an abstract implicit concept of the notion of the morpheme, which could be deduced from the stances expressed in the traditional discussion on the number of the Hebrew verbal patterns. Given that there is a fundmental semantic difference between the verbal system and the nominal system, this concept of the morpheme, based also on the semantic profile of a given word, entailed the distinction between verbs and nouns.
Uploads
Papers
The Kinḥis, R. Joseph and especially his son, R. David, presented a reformed term – "Tif'eret" – and besides its previous meaning, they used it in respect to exceptional occurrences of Dagesh (as in מִקְּדָשׁ [Exod. 15:17], חָדֵלּוּּ [Judg. 5:7]), which could not be explained as one of the regular known functions of Dagesh. This term continued to serve more or less in this sense later on in Hebrew grammars. But in some modern Hebrew grammars it is used in a narrower sense, referring only to a certain type of Dagesh, which appears in a few particles like לָמָּה, אֵלֶּה, etc. This was the last station in the winding course of this term's meanings, which is essentially different from its beginnings.
A close investigation of his grammatical descriptions reveals that in some cases, his descriptions were heavily modeled by German linguistics, while parallel presentations of those topics in Jewish or Christian Hebrew grammars seem to be more adequate. It is being suggested that the grounds for his preference of German linguistic sources lay on the common cultural attitude among Jewish scholars of the time towards the contemporary situation of Hebrew.
This study describes and examines how Hena applied this principle to his innovative view of the length of the Hebrew vowels and the structure of the Hebrew syllables. This examination includes Hena’s most famous, influential innovation: the notion of the "light vowel" (התנועה הקלה), which later produced the term "floating shewa" (שווא מרחף).
Thesis Chapters
Books
The Kinḥis, R. Joseph and especially his son, R. David, presented a reformed term – "Tif'eret" – and besides its previous meaning, they used it in respect to exceptional occurrences of Dagesh (as in מִקְּדָשׁ [Exod. 15:17], חָדֵלּוּּ [Judg. 5:7]), which could not be explained as one of the regular known functions of Dagesh. This term continued to serve more or less in this sense later on in Hebrew grammars. But in some modern Hebrew grammars it is used in a narrower sense, referring only to a certain type of Dagesh, which appears in a few particles like לָמָּה, אֵלֶּה, etc. This was the last station in the winding course of this term's meanings, which is essentially different from its beginnings.
A close investigation of his grammatical descriptions reveals that in some cases, his descriptions were heavily modeled by German linguistics, while parallel presentations of those topics in Jewish or Christian Hebrew grammars seem to be more adequate. It is being suggested that the grounds for his preference of German linguistic sources lay on the common cultural attitude among Jewish scholars of the time towards the contemporary situation of Hebrew.
This study describes and examines how Hena applied this principle to his innovative view of the length of the Hebrew vowels and the structure of the Hebrew syllables. This examination includes Hena’s most famous, influential innovation: the notion of the "light vowel" (התנועה הקלה), which later produced the term "floating shewa" (שווא מרחף).