Young rezetko linguistic dating review
Chapter 3 ( The Variation Analysis of the Hebrew Bible Corpus: The Method), the second longest chapter in the book, aims to establish the methodological framework of the study.Kim discusses several of the foundational ideas of sociolinguistics (the discipline dealing with the relationship between language and society) and historical sociolinguistics, such as linguistic variation and variationist analysis, and he explains how he will apply such concepts to the corpus of BH.(In the present context, a simplified definition of the variationist approach might be a quantitative analysis of two or more linguistic variables, or ways of saying the same thing, as a way of detecting language change.) Chapter 2 ( Linguistic Dating of Biblical Hebrew Texts: A Survey of Scholarship) reviews research on the linguistic development of BH, beginning with the period from Wilhelm Gesenius (usually considered the father of the diachronic study of BH) to Yechezkel Kutscher (Hurvitz's teacher), followed by a discussion of the work of Robert Polzin and a longer treatment of the work of Hurvitz, and their followers, and continuing with a summary of the work of scholars who have challenged various fundamental presuppositions and methods in previous scholarship.The chapter concludes with a list of seven points of agreement and (mainly) disagreement between Hurvitz and his followers and the challengers.In particular, he introduces the distinction between linguistic or dependent variables on the one hand, and independent variables or factors which condition variant linguistic forms/uses on the other.Independent variables include a speaker's/writer's age, gender/sex, social class/rank/status, region, style, etc.Late Biblical Hebrew: Critique of Principles Chapter 4 Early vs.
Unfortunately, we don't currently offer Express Delivery outside the UK, Gibraltar, Guernsey or Jersey.
Their point is that relating so-called Early Biblical Hebrew with so-called Late Biblical Hebrew in terms of chronology does not do justice to the evidence, involves circular reasoning and thus pervants that nature of linguistic diversity in the Hebrew Bible.
Here's a summary of their proposal: We suggest that following through the logic of this chronological approach to BH actually leads inevitably to the conclusion that all the biblical texts were composed in the postexilic period, which is exactly the opposite of what its proponents have claimed.