Biblical Hebrew Grammar Research Articles

On the Presence of the Andalusian Ḥayyūj’s Grammatical Theory in Abū al-Faraj Hārūn’s al-Kitāb al-Muštamil in the “East”

Abstract The purpose of the present paper is to show that the prominent grammarian Abū al-Faraj Hārūn (AFH), head of the Karaite Majlis in Jerusalem (first half of the eleventh century CE) was acquainted with the grammatical theory of the important Andalusian grammarian Yehudah Ḥayyūj (d. c. 1010 CE in Cordoba), whose writings had reached the Arabic-speaking east at an early stage, not long after his death. AFH described the grammar of Biblical Hebrew according to the accepted Karaite method and the classical Arabic grammatical theory, but also mentioned Ḥayyūj explicitly by name, and mentioned the latter’s grammatical method in explanations of words in the Bible. In his al-Muštamil, especially in the chapters on the letters, AFH provided explanations using Ḥayyūj’s method; he did not copy Ḥayyūj’s words but described phonological and morphological phenomena in his own words, based on Ḥayyūj’s theory. In other words, we will show that AFH was the first in the Arabic-speaking east to have used Ḥayyūj’s grammatical terminology and concepts, examples and explanations.

Significance of Hesed in the Blessing of Naomi: Exegetical and Theological Study of Ruth 1:8, 9

Significance of Hesed in the Blessing of Naomi: Exegetical and Theological Study of Ruth 1:8, 9

Exegetical Gems from Biblical Hebrew: A Refreshing Guide to Grammar and Interpretation

For many Biblical Hebrew students, the transition from learning grammar to undertaking exegesis can be difficult. As these students begin to wade through jargon-laden, reference-volume-style syntax books, they simultaneously swim upstream in their quest not to forget the basics of Biblical Hebrew grammar. Additionally, consulting syntax books and mastering morphology does not automatically produce the discernment necessary for sifting through various options and drawing out exegetical insights. Thankfully, H. H. Hardy II’s Exegetical Gems from Biblical Hebrew is now available.The book divides into 30 chapters that cover an array of topics such as word studies, prepositions, pronouns, verb conjugations, verb stems, volitives, verbless clauses, and textual criticism. Every chapter begins with an untranslated verse of Hebrew, and Hardy identifies a grammatical feature from the verse that impinges on exegesis to introduce the topic of the chapter. Hardy offers an overview of the grammatical and/or syntactical topic and then concludes the chapter by assessing how best to understand the grammatical and/or syntactical feature in the verse that opens the chapter.Since Hardy is a graduate of the University of Chicago, renowned for its specialization in ANE languages, I knew the material would be trustworthy, but I was curious to see whether he would be able to address a nonspecialist audience in a way that informs exegesis. I am pleased to report that his writing is clear, and grammatical explanations are succinct, lacking unnecessary jargon. For instance, he defines verbal aspect as describing “whether the action is viewed as temporally bounded (perfective) or not (imperfective)” (pp. 57–58). He then provides a table to illustrate these aspects.Additionally, Hardy intertwines grammatical and exegetical decision making effectively. The result is that the reader not only learns what Hardy thinks about an exegetical question but also develops exegetical instincts as Hardy weighs options and draws out his conclusions. For instance, ch. 23 deals with בְּיוֹם in Gen 2:17, which leads to an important discussion on compound prepositions. Beginners so often think a faithful translation of לִפְנֵי should be “before the face[s] of.” Oy vey! When he applies the discussion to בְּיוֹם in Gen 2:17, he notes that “the more sound method of deciphering this preposition, and in turn the phrase, is to compare the usage patterns of בְּיוֹם” (p. 150), not just בְּ and יוֹם separately. He surveys the options and notes that, when the compound is followed by an infinitive, as is the case in Gen 2:17, it is often a temporal marker better understood as “when” rather than “in the day.” The exegetical payoff becomes obvious. God is not lying when Adam and Eve do not die immediately “in the day” they eat the fruit, nor do we need to suggest that it must be spiritual death that God was warning about in the verse. Instead, “when” (בְּיוֹם) is a “temporal expression provides the setting of the warning” (p. 150).A final praise for this book is its multipurpose nature. The volume in part serves as a review of aspects of first-year grammar that are difficult to remember. For instance, the qatal/wayyiqtol, yiqtol/wəqatal, or volitional/wəqatal clause level combinations are difficult to grasp and easy to forget, so his five chapters that review these patterns via clear explanation and illustration will prove useful to many. Exegetical Gems from Biblical Hebrew also in part serves as a select reference guide. For example, the chapter on כִּי offers nine categories for its function, along with examples from the biblical text. Furthermore, the book provides a useful segue for recognizing how grammar and syntax contribute to exegesis, helping a student gain exposure to categories and develop discernment in exegesis.Readers may find certain chapters more useful than others, but this is the case with any book. This is the rare volume in the area of Hebrew grammar that I can heartily recommend as being worth reading cover to cover. I could imagine the book functioning well in the following ways. It could be assigned reading for the final weeks of a 2nd-semester Hebrew class. Or one could recommend that students read this over the summer to review their grammar and prepare for syntax and exegesis. Or one might assign this to students in 2nd-year Hebrew as a supplementary text book. Or, for pastors and others who need a refresher or want to keep sharp in Hebrew, this book will prove useful. Hardy and Baker Academic are to be thanked for providing us with a gem of a book in Exegetical Gems from Biblical Hebrew.

Hosea: A Handbook on the Hebrew Text

Hosea: A Handbook on the Hebrew Text

A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar

A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar

Intermediate Biblical Hebrew Grammar: A Student's Guide to Phonology and Morphology by Eric D. Reymond

Reviewed by: Intermediate Biblical Hebrew Grammar: A Student's Guide to Phonology and Morphology by Eric D. Reymond Samuel Boyd eric d. reymond, Intermediate Biblical Hebrew Grammar: A Student's Guide to Phonology and Morphology (RBS 89; Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018). Pp. xx + 333. Paper $44.95. Any student navigating the bewildering landscape between an introductory course in Biblical Hebrew and more advanced study knows the hazards involved in making the transition from beginning to intermediate knowledge of the language and its history. Indeed, the gap between learning vocabulary and paradigms, on the one hand, and conducting research in Biblical Hebrew, on the other, contains few signposts for help and orientation. While unpublished manuals have circulated for some time and some more recent publications offer more advanced orientations to the study of the history and development of the language, none provides an accessible explanation of intermediate concepts in the areas of phonology and morphology in well-written prose. Eric Reymond's new volume successfully fills this gap and is a much-needed resource for students and teachers alike. Reymond helpfully begins with a brief discussion of what Biblical Hebrew is as a means of introducing the reader to issues in the historical reconstruction of the language and resources available for such reconstruction. After a brief introductory chapter, he addresses the development of consonants and vowels in chaps. 2 and 3, respectively. R.'s grouping of roots with similar consonants and semantic domains is particularly helpful in chap. 2 and will aid students to gain confidence quickly in spotting broad meanings of certain lexemes. The organization of the chapter on vowels is logical and clear, which is especially useful in a book designed to explain difficult and complex subjects to intermediate students. The bibliographies in the discussions throughout are sufficient to give students further readings for explorations on a variety of topics, but the footnotes are not so cumbersome as to distract from the main body of the text. The tips for memory and further reflection at the end of chap. 3 will be especially useful for teachers and students. The last three chapters of the book contain information regarding nominal and verbal morphology as well as a chart of nouns and verbs. These chapters are followed by an appendix on how to produce a variety of nominal and verbal forms. R. also provides an up-to-date bibliography for further reading. It is difficult to find fault with this book, having as it does such great utility for teaching historical grammar in Hebrew. R. perhaps could have provided exercises for students to practice the reconstruction of historical elements of Biblical Hebrew (however speculative such exercises might be) from attested forms in the MT. Nonetheless, R. offers an invaluable contribution in this book, both for its accessible presentation of historical grammar (which has often remained inaccessible for many students and researchers in Semitic philology and biblical studies) as well as the manner in which R. exposes students and teachers alike to debates and further studies in the area of researching the development of Biblical Hebrew. [End Page 324] Samuel Boyd University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80302 Copyright © 2019 The Catholic Biblical Association of America

New Directions in the Computational Analysis of Biblical Hebrew Grammar

The concern of the paper is to highlight how computational analysis of Biblical Hebrew grammar can now be done in very sophisticated ways and with insightful results for exegesis. Three databases, namely, the Eep Talstra Centre for Bible and Computer (ETCBC) Database, the Accordance Hebrew Syntactic Database, and the Andersen-Forbes Syntactic Database,are compared in terms of their relation to linguistic theory (or, theories), the nature and spectrum of retrieved data, and the representation of synchronic and diachronic linguistic variation. Interaction between different contexts, including the African context, are promoted namely between linguists working on Biblical Hebrew and exegetes working on the Hebrew Bible by illustrating how exegesis and language are intimately connected, as well as among geographical contexts by comparing a European database (ETCBC), a North American database (Accordance) and a Southern hemisphere database (Andersen-Forbes).

Is the adjective distinct from the noun as a grammatical category in biblical Hebrew?

The adjective is a beleaguered category in biblical Hebrew grammar with many grammars of biblical Hebrew denying that the adjective is a category distinct from substantives. Within a variety of linguistic theories, the status of the adjective as a grammatical category is also debated. Cross-linguistically adjectives exhibit extraordinary variety: in some languages showing similarities to nouns, in others to verbs and in still others to both nouns and verbs. The debate concerning the status of the adjective is mirrored by the broader debate within contemporary linguistics concerning how the issue of grammatical categorisation ought to be approached. In this article, we re-examine the question of whether or not the adjective is a distinct grammatical category from the noun in biblical Hebrew. We approach the question of the status of the adjective as a grammatical category from two perspectives: morphology and syntax.

Biblical Hebrew Grammar Visualized. Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic 6

Biblical Hebrew Grammar Visualized. Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic 6

『성서 히브리어 문법』 : 주옹-무라오카, 김정우 역, 서울: 기혼, 2012

This review essay purposes to provide major contents and comments on the recent Korean translation of the book by Jouon-Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Its translator, Jung Woo Kim explained how difficult it has been to translate this book for the last ten years by comparing his translation work to the toil of Sisyphus in the Greek myth. It should be celebrated by Korean readers interested in the usages of Hebrew language in the Bible and be expected to revive Hebrew study in Korea.<BR> This essay contains three major parts in addition to the introduction and the conclusion. The first part (chapter 2) provides the summary and outline of the book, the second part (chapter 3) reviews Jouon and Muraoka’s English version, and the third part (chapter 4) deals with Jung Woo Kim’s Korean version.<BR> The distinguished features of Jouon and Muraoka’s English version are as follows: 1) It is the most comprehensive and voluminous book on the grammar of the Biblical Hebrew, 2) It focuses mostly on the synchronic dimension of Biblical Hebrew grammar, restricting itself to reconstructing the grammar of Tiberian Hebrew scholars, thus neglecting the diachronic dimension and variations of the synchronic approach such as the northern dialect of Biblical Hebrew. The explanations by the comparison with other semitic language are not reflected sufficiently to satisfy comparative semitic scholars, 3) It provides the detailed information on the syntax of Biblical Hebrew grammar by adopting the linguistic methodology of Indo-European language.<BR> Jung Woo Kim’s Korean version would be welcomed by Korean readers and become a monumental achievement in the history of Korean Hebrew studies. First of all, it would encourage Korean scholars to standardize Korean terms on Biblical Hebrew. Second, it would stimulate students of Hebrew language to provoke greater interest in the deeper level of the Bible as well as reviving Hebrew studies in Korea.

Review of Pratico, Gary D. and Miles V. Van Pelt, Basics of Biblical Hebrew Grammar (2nd. ed.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007) and idem, Basics of Biblical Hebrew Workbook (2nd. ed.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007).

Review of Pratico, Gary D. and Miles V. Van Pelt, Basics of Biblical Hebrew Grammar (2nd. ed.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007) and idem, Basics of Biblical Hebrew Workbook (2nd. ed.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007).

An Eleventh-Century Karaite Hebrew Grammar

An Eleventh-Century Karaite Hebrew Grammar Aharon Maman Geoffrey Khan, Judith Olszowy-Schlanger, and Maria Angeles-Gallego , EDS. The Karaite Tradition of Hebrew Grammatical Thought in Its Classical Form: A Critical Edition and English Translation of al-Kitāb al-Kāfi fī al-Luġa l-'Ibrāniyya by 'Abū al-Faraj Harūn ibn al-Faraj, I-II. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Pp. xci +­ 1097. The study of eleventh-century Karaite Hebrew grammar has been enhanced during the last two decades, especially since the Firkowitch manuscript collections in the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg are again accessible to the public. One of the immediate consequences is the publication of the critical edition of Abū l-Faraj's Al-Kitāb al-Kāfi fī al-Luġa l-'Ibrāniyya (hereafter: Al-kāfi), by Goeffrey Khan et al. 1 Prior to this publication, only small portions of Abū l-Faraj's works and theory have been studied and published. 2 For the first time, the text of any of Abū l-Faraj works is presented comprehensively. [End Page 466] Khan's introduction to Al-kāfi is historical and general. He touches little upon the contents of Al-kāfi, yet the text in its comprehensiveness speaks for itself. We are lucky that Al-kāfi survived not only in its entirety but also in several copies, one of which is assumed to be an autograph. Khan's translation into English is brilliant-it makes the text lucid and constitutes in itself a tremendous contribution to the field. Khan and his collaborators have accomplished the enormous task of collating the text of Al-kāfi and preparing the critical apparatus, in addition to the task of translating the original Arabic into English. [End Page 467] Al-Kāfi's Structure Al-kāfi was not Abū l-Faraj's first grammatical treatise. Initially he composed Al-Kitāb al-Mushtamil 'ala l-'Uṣū l wal-Fuṣūl fī l-Lugha l-'Ibrāniyya (The comprehensive book on the roots and branches of Hebrew language), which is an encyclopedic biblical Hebrew grammar; afterward he presented an abridged form in Al-kāfi; 3 then he went on to make a third and fourth shorter versions in the form of Al-Mukhtaṣar and Kitāb al-'Uqūd (pp. xi-xii). Unlike Al-kāfi, Mushtamil did not survive in its entirety, and its size contributed to its comparably poorer circulation and preservation. It was thus a wise decision on the part of the editors to prepare Al-kāfi first for publication. This decision is further justified by the fact that Abū l-Faraj's linguistic theory is the same in both Mushtamil and Al-kāfi. Indeed, Abū l-Faraj did not write Al-kāfi from scratch. He rather used the model and style he developed in Mushtamil. The material is presented according to the taqsīm (=classification) method (e.g. I.14.12, I.15.2), so much so that though Al-kāfi is an abridgement it is not as concise and economical as it could have been. For instance, the content of Mushtamil part III-where the grammar is presented in a mnemotechnic way following the Hebrew alphabet 4 -is well presented in the same structure in Al-kāfi, though not as an independent part but rather embedded in part I, chapters 24-28 (pp. 228-523). Though shortened to half its original size, this section in Al-kāfi is still extremely large, consisting of over 27,000 words and taking up about a quarter of the book. Many grammatical rules dealing with morphemes consisting of more than one servile letter, for example, are repeated in different sections for the sake of formality, because they are discussed in each of their composing letters. 5 Had Al-kāfi been redacted differently or had the rhetoric and dialectical style at least been avoided (as, e.g., in I.27.51 6 ), it would have been much smaller in scope. Hence Al-kāfi's basic organizational structure is not different from that of Mushtamil. The abridgement was achieved either by omitting...

The Vav-Prefixed Verb Forms in Elementary Hebrew Grammar

The application of linguistics to Biblical Hebrew grammar, particularly its verbal system, has continued in recent decades, while at the same time there has been an marked increase in the number of elementary Hebrew grammars. Sadly, few of these grammars appear to take into account the advances of the last century in the understanding of the Hebrew verbal system. In this article I examine the disconnect between scholarly discussions and elementary grammars with respect to the Hebrew vav-prefixed forms and illustrate how these forms might be explained to beginning Biblical Hebrew students in a way that takes into account recent linguistic insights.

The Restrictive Syntax of Genesis i 1

AbstractAlthough many Hebraists have departed from the traditional understanding of in Gen i 1 as an independent phrase with grammatical reference to "THE beginning," it is a view that continues to thrive, and is reflected by the majority of modern translations. Even advocates of the dependent phrase position (e.g., "when God began") struggle with a precise and compelling linguistic analysis. In this article I offer a linguistic argument that will both provide a simpler analysis of the grammar of Gen i 1 and make it clear that the traditional understanding of a reference to an 'absolute beginning' cannot be derived from the grammar of the verse. Instead, the syntax of the verse, based on well-attested features within biblical Hebrew grammar, dictates that there were potentially multiple periods or stages to God's creative work.

A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (review)

Hebrew Studies 48 (2007) 345 Reviews cism and postmodernism: “capturing the field” (p. 3), “broadside attacks” (p. 34), “conflict of approaches” (p. 17), and in the chapter on feminist criticism employs the word “fiercely” twice in as many pages to describe Schussler Fiorenza’s “committed” exegesis, a small but telling stylistic tick that presumably should have been caught by an editor. Early on in the book, while discussing the crisis in historiography in general and in the study of the history of Israel in particular, Collins makes passing comment on the recent work of Israel Finkelstein and William Dever. Their contribution, he writes, “seems refreshingly moderate and centrist ” (p. 39). There is, of course, something of a mirror to this commendation . True both to it and to his self-professed modernist training (p. 3), Collins finishes his own book by concluding that modernist and postmodernist approaches to the Bible can and should be complementary. Ultimately, for Collins, postmodern biblical criticism serves as a valuable corrective, and thus an important (but still lesser) partner, on a modernist project thereby rendered more suitably moderate and restrained. Or, as he puts it, postmodernist criticism, by “going out to the highways and byways to bring ‘new voices from the margin’ to the conversation” of biblical studies (p. 161) keeps the dialogue more honest “for people who are willing to enter a conversation in good faith and to pursue consensus, but not assume it” (p. 161). Although I do not know Professor Collins personally, this well-written and informative book is clear and important evidence of just such a desire. Matthew R. Anderson Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada matthew.a@sympatico.ca A GRAMMAR OF BIBLICAL HEBREW. By Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka. SubBi 27. Pp. xlv + 772. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 2006. Cloth, $79.00. Joüon’s grammar was originally meant as an intermediate scholarly grammar for students of Biblical Hebrew, as stated by the author in his preface to the original French edition (1923; English translation on pages vii–xi in the current edition). But in time, and owing to its fine qualities, this book acquired the status of an important reference grammar for students and scholars alike. The shift has been furthered by the significant project of an English translation and revision, accompanied by an extensive update of this grammar, undertaken by Prof. T. Muraoka in several editions and reprints, the latest of which is the one under review here. Hebrew Studies 48 (2007) 346 Reviews Though most Semitic and Biblical Hebrew scholars have long recognized the necessity of reading academic literature in the original French, German, Italian, etc., without intermediation, in recent decades English has largely become the main language of communication, discussion, and publication in Semitic and Biblical Hebrew fields of research. The English translation of Joüon’s grammar has accordingly played a crucial role in establishing his work as a standard study and reference tool for students and scholars alike. More important than the English translation is Muraoka’s extensive and persistent quest for new research outputs and methods in Semitic studies, especially Biblical Hebrew, and his blending them into Joüon’s grammar. The comprehensive nature of Muraoka’s updated project justifies the inclusion of Joüon’s grammar since the publication of the first English edition under the title of a joint “Joüon-Muraoka grammar.” As the edition under review here is not the first English edition, below I do not refer to all aspects of those earlier editions but only to those evident in the new one. The latest 2006 English edition has several prominent advantages which should cause any scholar or student immediately to prefer it to the previous editions. First, in this edition Muraoka has again inserted many new important bibliographical references, which bring the work up to date up to at least the end of 2003. Second, this edition is accompanied by an impressive bibliography (pp. 729–772), most entries of which, according to the preface to this edition (p. xviii), and as can be observed in the notable new author index on pp. 721–728, are mentioned in footnotes in the book. Apart from being an important...

An Elementary Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. By Edwin C. Hostetter. Biblical Languages: Hebrew 1. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000. Pp. 176. $84 (cloth), $29 (paperback).

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewAn Elementary Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. By Edwin C. Hostetter. Biblical Languages: Hebrew 1. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000. Pp. 176. $84 (cloth), $29 (paperback).Dennis PardeeDennis PardeeThe University of Chicago Search for more articles by this author The University of ChicagoPDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Near Eastern Studies Volume 65, Number 2April 2006 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/505008 Views: 1Total views on this site * Permission to reprint a book review in this section may be obtained only from the author.PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

A Second Look at Double Preverbal Constituents

A SECOND LOOK AT DOUBLE PREVERBAL CONSTITUENTS* Nicholas A. Bailey SIL International nicholas_bailey@sil.org A review of Doppelt besetztes Vorfeld: Syntaktische, pragmatische und übersetzungstechnische Studien zum althebräischen Verbalsatz. By Walter Gross. BZAW 305. Pp. xiv + 347. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2001. Cloth, € 98.00. $118.17. Walter Gross, known for other works on Biblical Hebrew constituent order,1 has bravely set out to explore some rough terrain: clauses with two (or more) preverbal nominal constituents, especially in poetry, and how translators have handled such clauses. This insightful and richly illustrated work has important implications for the fields of Biblical Hebrew grammar, discourse, and rhetorical structure. To be sure, to appreciate such a work, a significant investment is required on the part of the reader. “Pragmatics” and specifically the subfield of “information structure” are still relatively immature and many notions such as “topic” and “focus,” which Gross employs, are hotly debated among linguists. Still, these fields potentially have much to offer the Hebrew grammarian, exegete, and translator. In fact, an exegete’s job is not truly complete until such meaning has been accounted for. Along these lines, I offer here a critical assessment of Gross’s contribution, pointing to several areas—particularly his definitions and method—where alternative perspectives would help. In assessing Gross, I refer to several current linguistic theories, especially Lambrecht’s (1994), which has, to different degrees, been the basis for Heimerdinger (1999), Shimasaki (2002), and van der Merwe.2 * I wish to thank Nick Lunn and Stephen Levinsohn for their helpful comments on drafts of this article. 1 See especially W. Gross, Die Satzteilfolge im Verbalsatz alttestamentlicher Prosa: Untersucht an den Büchern Dtn, Ri und 2Kön (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1996). 2 K. Lambrecht, Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1994). See C. H. J. van der Merwe, “Explaining Fronting in Biblical Hebrew,” JNSL 25 (1999): 173–186, and his review of Gross (Die Satzteilfolge) in C. H. J. van der Merwe, “Towards a Better Understanding of Biblical Hebrew Word Order,” JNSL 25 (1999): 277–300. See J.-M. Heimerdinger, Topic, Focus and Foreground in Ancient Hebrew Narratives (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), and a critical review of the same in S. H. Levinsohn, “Review of Topic, Focus and Foreground in Ancient Hebrew Narratives,” JOTT 14 (2002): 126–147. See K. Shimasaki, Focus Structure in Biblical Hebrew (Bethesda, Md.: CDL Press, 2002) and a critical review of the same in R. D. Holmstedt, “Adjusting Our Focus,” HS (2003): 129–138. Neither Heimerdinger nor Shimasaki have exhausted the usefulness of applying Lambrecht’s theory to Hebrew. Hebrew Studies 45 (2004) 254 Review Essay With the exception of some of his technical terms, I have usually translated quotations from Gross into English in order to make his claims more accessible . German spellings, for example, Topik, Fokus, etc., indicate his notions, since they often diverge with other definitions of topic and focus that I mention. 1.¬BOOK SUMMARY Gross’s study concerns finite verbal clauses with multiple preverbal nominal constituents—which I will simply call “preverbals.” Gross describes these nominal constituents as in the Vorfeld “pre-field,” that is, before a finite verb, as opposed to ones in the Hauptfeld “main field,” that is, following a finite verb. Gross presents the following clause schema, which I have slightly modified for the present reader (pp. 5–6). The first preverbal, P1, precedes the second preverbal, P2, (and P3). other sentence conjunctions, particles, and adverbs, e.g., hto, Nkl, hnh P1 P2 (P3) “preverbal constituents 1, 2, and 3” … w Vorfeld “pre-field” (preverbal area) Verb area Hauptfeld “main field” (postverbal area) By preverbal nominal constituents, Gross means any nominal, with or without a preposition. This designation excludes vocatives and constituents in casus pendens (i.e., left-dislocation), as well as conjunctions, particles, and some deictics and adverbials, which can additionally occur preverbally (i.e., before P1). The “verb” area holds the finite verb itself plus any particles (e.g., al or la) or any infinitive absolute of the same root that might accompany it. There are ten chapters in the book. The supplements include...

Biblical Hebrew for Students of Modern Israeli Hebrew

This is the first textbook written for the purpose of teaching biblical Hebrew to college-level students who already know some modern, Israeli Hebrew. Marc Brettler provides a clear, comprehensive book with numerous well-constructed exercises to help students either make the transition from modern Israeli Hebrew to biblical Hebrew or deepen their understanding of biblical Hebrew. The book is also ideal for individuals who might like to study independently, and for serious Jewish adult-education programmes. Biblical Hebrew for Students of Modern Israeli Hebrew is unique in its emphasis on phonology, based on the conviction that a strong grounding in phonology makes it possible to learn biblical Hebrew grammar in a much more systematic fashion. This method also allows verbal conjugations to be taught much more quickly and systematically. Although the text is not inductive, it uses authentic biblical texts throughout to illustrate fundamental points, and it contains many biblical texts in the exercises. Students progressing through the book will quickly be encouraged by a sense of accomplishment as they encounter and understand well-known biblical passages.

Habakkuk 3:16—Where Did the אֲשֶר Go?

Almost every modern treatment of the אֲשֶר in Hab 3:16 opts to emend the text to a form of אַשֶר "step," citing the text of the Septuagint as support. The few exegetes that choose to maintain the Masoretic Text interpret the אֲשֶר as either a causal or concessive particle. In this article, I will argue that neither option is viable—the first does not have convincing textual support; the second reflects an inaccurate understanding of Biblical Hebrew grammar. Rather, I will propose that the אֲשֶר clause in Hab 3:16 is an "extraposed relative clause" that modifies the substantive תְַּחְתִּי

An Elementary Grammar of Biblical Hebrew

1University of Sheffield An Elementary Grammar of Biblical Hebrew Edwin C.Hostetter (Biblical Languages: Hebrew 1). Sheffield Academic PressSheffield 2000176Hardback£53.50 1‐84127‐101‐2Paperback£18.95 1‐84127‐102‐0