Skip to main content
Open Book Publishers

2. 1st-person wayyiqṭol Morphology: 1st-person wayyiqṭol Morphology

  • Aaron D. Hornkohl (author)
Chapter of: Diachronic Diversity in Classical Biblical Hebrew(pp. 39–56)

Export Metadata

  • ONIX 3.1
  • ONIX 3.0
    • Thoth
    • Project MUSE
      Cannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
    • OAPEN
    • JSTOR
      Cannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
    • Google Books
      Cannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
    • OverDrive
      Cannot generate record: No priced EPUB or PDF URL
  • ONIX 2.1
  • CSV
  • JSON
  • OCLC KBART
  • BibTeX
  • CrossRef DOI deposit
    Cannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
  • MARC 21 Record
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 Markup
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 XML
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Metadata
Title2. 1st-person wayyiqṭol Morphology
Subtitle1st-person wayyiqṭol Morphology
ContributorAaron D. Hornkohl (author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0433.02
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0433/chapters/10.11647/obp.0433.02
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
CopyrightAaron D. Hornkohl
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2024-11-11
Long abstractThe study of 1st-person wayyiqṭol morphology in Biblical Hebrew (BH) reveals three distinct patterns—short, long, and augmented forms—each linked to different historical phases and sources. In Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH) and other post-exilic biblical traditions and extrabiblical sources texts there is a marked preference for long and augmented forms. Bn contrast, Classical Biblical Hebrew (CBH), particularly the Torah, shows a conservative retention of shorter wayyiqṭol forms, reflecting an earlier linguistic stage, as confirmed by comparative data from the Meshaʿ Stele. For their part, non-Pentateuchal CBH texts, i.e., in the Prophets Writings, appear to display a transitional phase, where long forms are common, but augmented forms are rare. Though the historical development of the three patterns is variously explained, the chapter argues that internal diversity within CBH is most compellingly explained as an organic linguistic difference between CBH sub-chronolects. The study raises questions about the conventional dichotomy between CBH and LBH, suggesting the need for finer distinctions within the diachronic framework of Biblical Hebrew. It also weighs implications for the Documentary Hypothesis.
Page rangepp. 39–56
Print length18 pages
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Contributors

Aaron D. Hornkohl

(author)
Associate Professor in Hebrew at University of Cambridge
https://www.ames.cam.ac.uk/people/dr-aaron-d-hornkohl

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.