LEADER 06636nam 2200721 450 001 9910787704503321 005 20230803195357.0 010 $a3-11-037292-4 010 $a3-11-033578-6 024 7 $a10.1515/9783110335781 035 $a(CKB)2670000000533825 035 $a(EBL)1609430 035 $a(SSID)ssj0001108876 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12399950 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001108876 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)11104467 035 $a(PQKB)11193873 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC1609430 035 $a(DE-B1597)213708 035 $a(OCoLC)870947921 035 $a(OCoLC)885390434 035 $a(DE-B1597)9783110335781 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL1609430 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10848960 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL577511 035 $a(EXLCZ)992670000000533825 100 $a20140326h20142014 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurnn#---|u||u 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$a"To teach" in ancient Israel $ea cognitive linguistic study of a biblical Hebrew lexical set /$fWendy L. Widder 210 1$aBerlin, [Germany] :$cDe Gruyter,$d2014. 210 4$dİ2014 215 $a1 online resource (256 p.) 225 1 $aBeihefte zur Zeitschrift fu?r die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft,$x0934-2575 ;$vVolume 456 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 0 $a3-11-033549-2 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $tFront matter --$tAcknowledgments --$tContents --$tList of Tables and Figures --$tList of Abbreviations --$t1. Introduction --$t2. Methodology --$t3. ??? in the Hiphil --$t4. ??? in the Qal and Piel --$t5. ??? in the Hiphil --$t6. ??? in the Piel --$t7. Synthesis and Summary --$tAppendix A: Prototype Meanings and Profiles of ???-H, ???-D, ???-H, ???-D --$tAppendix B: Meaning Potentials of BH Lexical Set "Teach" --$tList of References --$tScripture Index 330 $aThis book employs cognitive linguistics to determine the foundational elements of the ancient Israelites' concept of teaching as reflected in the text of the Hebrew Bible and Ben Sira. It analyzes four prominent lexemes that comprise a lexical set referring to the act of teaching: ???-H, ???-D, ???-H, and ???-D. The study concludes that, in its most basic form, the concept of teaching in ancient Israel was that a teacher creates the conditions in which learning can occur. The methodology employed in this project is built on a premise of cognitive studies, namely, that because teaching is a universal human activity, there is a universal concept of teaching: one person A recognizes that another person B lacks knowledge, belief, skills, and the like (or has incomplete or distorted knowledge, etc.), and person A attempts to bring about a changed state of knowledge, belief, or skill in person B. This universal concept provides the starting place for understanding the concept of teaching that Biblical Hebrew reflects, and it also forms the conceptual base against which the individual lexemes are profiled. The study incorporates a micro-level analysis and a macro-level analysis. At the micro-level, each lexeme is examined with respect to its linguistic forms (the linguistic analysis) and the contexts in which the lexeme occurs (the conceptual analysis). The linguistic analysis considers the clausal constructions of each instantiation and determines what transitivity, ditransitivity, or intransitivity contributes to the meaning. Collocations of the lexeme, including prepositional phrases, adverbial adjuncts, and parallel verbs, are evaluated for their contribution to meaning. The conceptual analysis of each lexeme identifies the meaning potential of each word, as well as what aspect of the meaning potential each instantiation activates. The study then determines the lexeme's prototypical meaning, which is profiled on the base of the universal concept of teaching. This step of profiling represents an important adaptation of the cognitive linguistics tool of profiling to meet the special requirements of working with ancient texts in that it profiles prototype meanings, not instantiations. In the macro-analysis, the data of all four lexemes in the lexical set are synthesized. The relationships among the lexemes are assessed in order to identify the basic level lexeme and consider whether the lexemes form a folk taxonomy. Finally, the profiles of the four prototype meanings are collated and compared in order to describe the ancient Israelite concept of teaching. The study finds that the basic level item of the lexical set is ???-D based on frequency of use and distribution. In its prototypical definition, ???-D means to intentionally put another person in a state in which s/he can acquire a skill or expertise through experience and practice. In contrast to this sustained kind of teaching, the prototypical meaning of ???-H is situational in nature: a person of authority or expertise gives specific, situational instruction to someone who lacks knowledge about what to do. The lexemes ???-D and ???-H represent the most restricted and the most expansive lexemes, respectively: the prototypical meaning of ???-D is to attempt to bring about changed behavior in another person through verbal or physical means, often to the point of causing pain; the prototypical meaning of ???-H is that a person of authority causes another person to be in a state of knowing something from the divine realm or related to experiences with the divine realm. The study determines that while the four lexemes of the Biblical Hebrew lexical set "to teach" have significant semantic overlap, they cannot be construed in a folk taxonomy because the words are not related in a hierarchical way. 410 0$aBeihefte zur Zeitschrift fu?r die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft ;$vVolume 456. 606 $aJews$xEducation$xHistory$yTo 70 A.D 606 $aEducation$xPhilosophy$xHistory$yTo 70 A.D 606 $aTeaching$xPhilosophy$xHistory$yTo 70 A.D 610 $aBiblical Hebrew. 610 $aCognitive linguistics. 610 $asemantic analysis. 610 $ateaching. 615 0$aJews$xEducation$xHistory 615 0$aEducation$xPhilosophy$xHistory 615 0$aTeaching$xPhilosophy$xHistory 676 $a370.95694 686 $aBC 6960$2rvk 700 $aWidder$b Wendy L.$f1968-$01476330 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910787704503321 996 $a"To teach" in ancient Israel$93690905 997 $aUNINA