LEADER 03261nam 2200409 450 001 9910647294303321 005 20230608214228.0 035 $a(CKB)5840000000234060 035 $a(NjHacI)995840000000234060 035 $a(EXLCZ)995840000000234060 100 $a20230515d2023 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aHistorical Depth of the Tiberian Reading Tradition of Biblical Hebrew /$fAaron D. Hornkohl 210 1$aCambridge, United Kingdom :$cOpen Book Publishers,$d2023. 215 $a1 online resource (560 pages) 311 $a1-80064-981-9 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aIntro -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- Part I: Conscious Replacement -- 1. The Tetragrammaton -- 2. and Similar -- 3. Ketiv-Qere Euphemisms -- Part II: Linguistic Developments -- 4. The Proper Name Issachar -- 5 Liqra(?)t? -- 6. The 2MS Endings -- 7. The 2FS Endings -- 8. The Qere Perpetuum -- 9. The 2/3FPL Endings -- 10. Nifalisation -- 11. Hifilisation -- 12. Pielisation -- 13. Hitpaelisation -- 14. T??r?m Qat?al -- 15. Ha-Qat?al -- 16. Wayyiqt?ol -- 17. 1st-person Wayyiqt?ol -- 18. I-y We-yiqt?ol for Weqat?al -- Conclusion -- References -- Index. 330 $aThis volume explores an underappreciated feature of the standard Tiberian Masoretic tradition of Biblical Hebrew, namely its composite nature. Focusing on cases of dissonance between the tradition's written (consonantal) and reading (vocalic) components, the study shows that the Tiberian spelling and pronunciation traditions, though related, interdependent, and largely in harmony, at numerous points reflect distinct oral realisations of the biblical text. Where the extant vocalisation differs from the apparently pre-exilic pronunciation presupposed by the written tradition, the former often exhibits conspicuous affinity with post-exilic linguistic conventions as seen in representative Second Temple material, such as the core Late Biblical Hebrew books, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Ben Sira, rabbinic literature, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and contemporary Aramaic and Syriac material. On the one hand, such instances of written-reading disharmony clearly entail a degree of anachronism in the vocalisation of Classical Biblical Hebrew compositions. On the other, since many of the innovative and secondary features in the Tiberian vocalisation tradition are typical of sources from the Second Temple Period and, in some cases, are documented as minority alternatives in even earlier material, the Masoretic reading tradition is justifiably characterised as a linguistic artefact of profound historical depth. 606 $aHebrew language, Post-Biblical 606 $aHebrew language 606 $aReligion$xHistory 615 0$aHebrew language, Post-Biblical. 615 0$aHebrew language. 615 0$aReligion$xHistory. 676 $a492.4 700 $aHornkohl$b Aaron D.$0851328 801 0$bNjHacI 801 1$bNjHacl 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910647294303321 996 $aHistorical Depth of the Tiberian Reading Tradition of Biblical Hebrew$93363097 997 $aUNINA