11. Abstract Nouns Ending in -ūt
- Aaron D. Hornkohl (author)
Export Metadata
- ONIX 3.1
- ONIX 3.0
- ONIX 2.1
- CSV
- JSON
- OCLC KBART
- BibTeX
- CrossRef DOI depositCannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
- MARC 21 RecordCannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
- MARC 21 MarkupCannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
- MARC 21 XMLCannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
| Title | 11. Abstract Nouns Ending in -ūt |
|---|---|
| Contributor | Aaron D. Hornkohl (author) |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0433.11 |
| Landing page | https://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0433/chapters/10.11647/obp.0433.11 |
| License | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
| Copyright | Aaron D. Hornkohl |
| Publisher | Open Book Publishers |
| Published on | 2024-11-11 |
| Long abstract | Elitzur (2018a) examines the occurrence of abstract nouns ending in -ūt in the Masoretic tradition of the Hebrew Bible, noting a distinct pattern that distinguishes the Pentateuch from other biblical texts. His analysis highlights that these nouns are relatively rare in the Pentateuch and often written defectively, while they are more frequent and usually spelled plene (with waw) in the Prophets and Writings. Elitzur investigates specific examples such as גַּבְלֻת ‘twistedness’ and עֵדֻת ‘testimony’ to support this observation. He raises the question of whether the defective spelling in the Pentateuch signifies a historical mismatch between written and spoken forms or if many words with defective -ūt originally ended with a different suffix, later adapted under changing linguistic norms. Building on and extending Elitzur’s study, the discussion reveals the complexities of diachrony in Hebrew, particularly regarding the -ūt endings, which are often deemed characteristic of later forms of the language. Cohen (2012) has challenged this characterisation, arguing that their distribution is comparable within both the Torah and later texts. The chapter problematises this viewpoint, suggesting that the focus should be on the frequency of tokens rather than on mere number of lexemes. Among other things, it is pointed out that the orthographic discrepancies in the usage of -ūt in the Torah could reflect underlying morphological differences, i.e., that they might represent a later reinterpretation of forms that originally had different suffixes. Ultimately, the evidence suggests a complex interplay between orthography and morphology, underscoring the challenges in tracing the historical development of these noun forms in biblical Hebrew. |
| Page range | pp. 177–182 |
| Print length | 6 pages |
| Language | English (Original) |
| Landing Page | Full text URL | Platform | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0433/chapters/10.11647/obp.0433.11 | Landing page | https://books.openbookpublishers.com/10.11647/obp.0433.11.pdf | Full text URL |
Aaron D. Hornkohl
(author)Aaron D. Hornkohl (PhD, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2012) is University Associate Professor in Hebrew, Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, University of Cambridge. His research focuses on ancient Hebrew philology and linguistics, especially historical linguistics and ancient Hebrew periodisation; the components of the standard Tiberian Masoretic biblical tradition; and that tradition’s profile in the context of other biblical traditions and extrabiblical sources. This is his third single-author monograph after The Historical Depth of the Tiberian Reading Tradition of Biblical Hebrew (Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 2023) and Ancient Hebrew Periodization and the Book of Jeremiah (Leiden: Brill 2014). He has also co-edited several volumes and written numerous articles.