Reassessing the third person pronominal “copula” in spoken Israeli Hebrew

This paper reassesses the widespread claim in Hebrew linguistics that the medial third person pronoun in the “subject NP + pronoun + predicate” construction in Israeli Hebrew functions either as copula, or as a referential subject in an extrapositional sentence. Based on the examination of this construction in Hebrew conversation, as represented in The Corpus of Spoken Israeli Hebrew (CoSIH), and based on theoretical considerations, the paper argues that the distinction between copular and referential uses of medial third person pronouns is not justified, leading to the conclusion that apparent “copular” third person pronouns are in fact a second realization of the subject referent, and that sentences containing such pronouns are better viewed as cases of subject doubling. This paper positions subject doubling in the context of typology and language acquisition, and argues for the need to analyze it using natural data, focusing on speaker- and listener- oriented motivations.

The Niphal as middle voice and its consequence for meaning

The central thesis of this article is that improved knowledge of the Niphal can offer us arguments in favour of (or against) certain meanings of verbs in biblical texts. Proceeding from general linguistic studies of middle voice to Biblical Hebrew linguistics, the differences between the active, reflexive, middle and passive voices are clarified. Subsequently, it is shown that the Niphal expresses neither the reflexive nor passive voice, but predominantly marks the middle voice. The Niphal describes an event in which the subject is concerned with itself, though not reflexively as a differentiated object, but as an undifferentiated middle, while reference to an external Agent is absent. These insights are applied to various texts and verbs in the Hebrew Bible, namely, 3 Niphals of the verb גמל‎ (‘wean’), 7 Niphals (feminine singular) of the verb טמא‎ (‘defile’), and 16 usages of אסף‎ Niphal in contexts of dying.

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

In this article we examine how Qumran Hebrew can contribute to our knowledge of historical Hebrew linguistics. The premise of this paper is that Qumran Hebrew reflects a distinct stage in the development of Hebrew which sets it apart from Biblical Hebrew. It is further assumed that these unique features are able to assist us to understand the nature of the development of Biblical Hebrew in a more precise way. Evidence from the syntax of participial negation at Qumran as opposed to Biblical Hebrew provides evidence for this claim.Keywords: Qumran Hebrew; Biblical Hebrew; historical linguistics;l Dead Sea Scrolls

Sa’adyah the Linguist

This chapter recounts how Sa'adyah Gaon was drawn to the study of Hebrew from his earliest youth. It describes Hebrew linguistics as an ancillary discipline to biblical exegesis that sought to plumb the linguistic depths of a particular sacred corpus. It also highlights the relationship of the biblical exegesis to the Holy Tongue that remained essentially passive, while the writing of poetry required an active knowledge of the appropriate language. The chapter emphasizes the important role Hebrew linguistics and writing poetry play in Palestine-centred Jewish culture of Sa'adyah's upbringing. It cites the Masoretes and liturgical poets that had devoted considerable energies to linguistic study before Sa'adyah's time.