An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

‘muslin’ (cf. Mosul) and ‘scallion’ (cf. Ashqelon) came to Europe from the Near
East. 34
c Poetic traditions (and to a lesser extent all literary traditions) preserve older
vocabulary and grammatical forms that have been lost from ordinary speech and
plain prose. The lexical and morphological resources thus tend to be larger. These
linguistic facts [Page 59] interact in complex ways with other structural features
of Hebrew verse. It is important to see the grammar in poetry in the context of
Hebrew grammar. Loose notions of a special vocabulary and grammar of poetry
are linguistically uninformed. 35
d A major source of variation is geography, although geographical variation is
frequently also determined by other factors as well. It is customary to call
geographically distinct language systems dialects, and to speak of a language as a
group of mutually intelligible dialects. This terminological distinction should not
be taken too seriously: languages and dialects overlap and interlock in various
ways. Some types of English are not intelligible to one another, but a common
tradition of writing and culture binds them together. A priori we would expect that
the geographical area of southern Palestine would have been linguistically diverse
in ancient times, particularly since social instruments of standardization were not
well developed. Some of the inscriptional evidence supports this expectation, as
does the biblical text to a slight degree. Most of Biblical Hebrew is, in fact, in the
dialect of Jerusalem, and little material remains to fill in the dialect geography of
the surrounding areas.
e The Bible does itself bear witness to regional linguistic differences among the
Israelites, in Judges 12. The Ephraimites in Cisjordan could not pronounce
sĭbbolet in the same way as the Gileadites in Transjordan. The Ephraimite variant,
sibbolet, was used as a linguistic marker: a Gileadite, suspecting someone of being
Ephraimite, would test that person by pointing to an ear of corn (or perhaps a
stream; sĭbbolet means both) and asking what he called it. Using the Ephraimite s
34 There is no up-to-date study of loanwords in Biblical Hebrew. M. Ellenbogen,
Foreign Words in the Old Testament (London: Luzac, 1962), is badly outdated. A
model treatment of loans and their context is S. A. Kaufman, The Akkadian Influences
on Aramaic (Assyriological Studies 19; Chicago: The Oriental Institute, 1974); cf. M.
O’Connor, “The Arabic Loanwords in Nabatean Aramaic,” Journal of Near Eastern
Studies 45 (1986) 213–29.
35 See D. A. Robertson, Linguistic Evidence in Dating Early Hebrew Poetry (Society
of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 3; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1972); M.
O’Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1980); A.
Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington: Indiana University,
1985); E. L. Greenstein, “Aspects of Biblical Poetry,” Jewish Book Annual 44 (1986–
87) 33–42.