HEBREW LANGUAGE. In the Old Testament, Hebrew is called sephath Kena`an "the lip of Canaan," or Yehudhith, "Jewish" ; the later Jews designated it leshon haqqodhesh, "the sacred tongue"; the term `ibhrith, "Hebrew," was coined by the Rabbis of Palestine. The English, name comes from the Greek E13paios, "Hebrew," whose adverb ii3pa"cvri, "in Hebrew," is applied to Biblical Hebrew in the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus (c. 13o B.c) ; this adjective is derived from the Aramaic `ibhray, "Hebrew." Hebrew is a Semitic language (see SEMITIC LANGUAGES), and monuments in it range from the 9th or loth centuries B.C. to the present day. It was a mixed speech, to whose composition elements from several Semitic languages contributed ; further, a few primi tive words may have come from a non-Semitic people who, arch aeology shows, once inhabited Palestine. Egyptian and Babylonian documents prove that a West-Semitic (Canaanite) language re sembling Hebrew was current in Canaan before the coming of the Hebrews. Egyptian documents from the 16th century B.C. on wards reveal over 1,200 Semitic words, some common to various Semitic languages, others peculiar to the Syro-Canaanite branch; e.g., Eg.-Can. `nb (Hebr. `endbh), "grape," occurred in Aramaic and Arabic, but Eg.-Can. brt (=Hebr. berith), "covenant," was confined to Hebrew. The feminine nouns preserved the primitive ending -t, which had already become -h in the Old Testament; e.g., Eg.-Can. spt (=Hebr. 'ashpdh), "quiver." In the earlier words the plural and dual took -n, as in Aramaic, but later -m, as in classical Hebrew; thus the Eg.-Can. krmyn (c. 'zoo B.c.) gave place to krmym, which was closer to the Hebrew kerdmirn, "vine yards" (c. I I00 B.c.) . The form in -n survived in the North Palestinian dialect of Hebrew, as sidonin for sidonim, "Sidon ians"; similarly the Eg.-Can. sh- corresponded with the dialectical Hebr. she- (for the correct 'fisher), "who," "which." These texts exhibit many names of places afterwards famous, as well as those of deities like `slitrt (=Hebr. `ashtoreth), "Astarte," and of per sons like 'brm (=Hebr. 'abrdm), "Abram," especially in composi tion. Many terms describing common objects, either in composi tion or independently, appear early in the texts; e.g., Eg.-Can. rsh (=Hebr. ro'sh), "head," and Eg.-Can. kmli (=Hebr. qemah), "flour." Others, having changed their meanings or not having survived in Hebrew literature, emphasize the fact that much has disappeared from the Hebrew vocabulary. The cuneiform corre spondence found in Egypt, chiefly between the Egyptian kings and their vassals in Syria and Palestine (c. 140o B.c.) , also exhibits a language similar to, but older than, biblical Hebrew. These letters were written in a Babylonian exhibiting Western peculiari ties closely approximate to Hebrew idiom : the Babylonian per mansive tense, expressing properly a state, served also to describe a past action, like the Hebrew perfect with whose form it was identical; the Babylonian preterite, like the Hebrew imperfect with which its form agreed, served to express incomplete action in present time ; the first person singular of the permansive (per fect) was closer to Hebrew than to Babylonian; e.g., Bah.-Can. nasrdti ( =Hebr. ndsarti, not Bab. nasrdku) "I have kept"; a passive is formed by the internal modification of the vowels ; e.g., Bab.-Can. yudan (=Hebr. yuttan) , "is given." This passive type, though unknown in Babylonian, is found sporadically in Hebrew and regularly in Arabic. But the principal evidence lies in the Canaanite glosses which, more than too in number, were added to explain Babylonian terms; for they closely resemble pure Hebrew. Thus the Bab. ina qdtisliu is explained by the Can. badiu (=Hebr, beyddho), "in his hand," Bab. elippu, by Can. anaya (=Hebr. "oniyah), "ship," and so on. Again, the language of these glosses is earlier than Hebrew; e.g., Bab.-Can. yakwun, "is," in which the half-vowel w is retained, is older than a form like the Hebr. ydqicm, "he arises," in which it has been assimilated to the u (cf. Pun. ichon, "he is") ; it preserved also the old feminine -t, as in abadat (cf. Hebr. 'dbliedhiih), "is ruined," which rarely ap peared in Biblical Hebrew. These texts prove the pronominal suffix -mo, which is a late poetical variety of the usual -m, "their," to be a genuine archaism; for example, Bab.-Can. panimu corre sponds with the archaistic Hebr. pdnemo, not the classical Hebr. penehem, "their face." Most place-names, many of them after wards found in the Old Testament, and some personal names exhibit purely Canaanite forms; and divine names like the Bab. Can. ba`alu or dagan, contained in various proper names, are identical with the Hebr. ba`al, "Baal," and ddghon, "Dagon." Clearly, Canaanite, as reflected in these ancient Egyptian and Babylonian texts, though not merely a form of Hebrew, certainly contributed much to it.
Hebrew. This is illustrated by certain differences in the vowels: where old Aramaic prefers a, Canaanite and Phoenician prefer
(o), while the alternations in Hebrew betray its composite origin ; for example, ro'sh, "head," goes back to the Can. and Phoen. rush, but ra'shim, "heads," to the Aram. ra'sh. Again, in certain weak verbs Hebrew prefers the Aramaic a in the active but the Canaanite u (o) in the reflexive (passive) voice; for example, the active nahti agrees with the Aram. naht against the Can. nuhti, "I rested," while a form like the passive nakhon, "was established," reflects the Canaanite vocalization. The vocabulary, however, exhibits few words which are undoubtedly old Aramaic.
Another element comes from the Eastern (Accadian or Assyro Babylonian) branch of the Semitic family. Through this it ob tained a few Sumerian loan-words, like Izekhdl, "temple," through Acc. ekallu, "palace," from Sum. E.GAL, "great house." Those weak verbs, whose last two consonants are identical, show this Accadian (and Aramaic) element; for example, the alternatives qasas and gas represent the Acc. qasis and the Aram. qas "cut," respectively. Similarly the alternatives mfshor and meshar, "justice," represent the Phoen. misor and the Acc. misharu, "justice," respectively.
'anoklzi and 'ani reflect, the first, the Bab.-Can. anuki (cf. Acc. anaku) and the second, the Aram. 'and (cf. vulgar Arab. 'anf ), "I"; the Hebr. 'el and 'elo'ah reflect the Bab.-Can. ilu and Phoen. el (cf. Acc. ilu) and the Aram. elaha (cf. Arab.
"God," respectively.
There are even occasionally three synonyms each from a dif ferent source in current use.
Aramaean (Amorite) and Canaanite. Now the correspondence from Tallu-'1-'Amarna. tells of people called tlabiru pressing into Syria and Palestine from the north-east and the east. The name can hardly be dissociated from that of the Hebrews (cf. Bab.-Can. haparu = Hebr. `aplzar, "dust," in illustration of the philological equation) ; but the people are not the biblical Hebrews, if only because of their time and manner of entering Palestine. Cunei form sources, however, relate that they came from Mesopotamia, through Hittite territory, into Syria and Palestine; so tradition asserts that Abraham came from Babylonia by Haran, through Hittite and Amorite territory, into Palestine. The analysis, too, of the Hebrew language shows that those who spoke it borrowed elements from and therefore in all probability passed through lands whose inhabitants spoke the Babylonian, Amorite (or Ara maean) and Canaanite languages. Thus history and philology confirm the traditional origin of the Hebrew people.
probably in the Masoretic editing of the sacred text, which obliterated all local peculiarities. The Amorites substituted s for sh; and a trace of this is seen when the Ephraimites said sibboleth for shibboleth. Another mark of dialect was the Gileadite use of shamed` (cf. Ass. shameanu and Eth. sama`f), "hearer," for 'edh, "witness." Again, the North-Palestinian narratives preferred 'atti to 'att, "thou" (fem.), zolz to zo'th, "this" (fem.), and exhibited a few other Aramaizing peculiarities, notably in certain pronominal suffixes. This explanation probably accounts for cer tain infinitives, like halokh for lekheth, "to go," used by the Elohist. The use of melokhah for molkhah, "rule," `alaz for `alas, "exulted," and `al, "upon," for 'el, "unto," may also be dialectical. But certainty on this point, in view of the lack of sufficient evidence, is unattainable.
alike by Moabites, Hebrews, Phoenicians (who transmitted it to the Greeks), and Aramaeans. The earliest Hebrew examples occur on the Calendar from Gezer (c. 8th century B.c.) and on the in scription in the Pool of Siloam (c. 70o B.c.) ; there are, however, earlier instances in other languages. This character remained longest unaltered in Hebrew and Phoenician. The transition to the "square script" was effected first in Aramaic and later in Hebrew, undoubtedly in consequence of the growing influence of Aramaic immediately before the Christian era. It was called the "Assyrian script" on the assumption that it was the hand of the Eastern Aramaeans, which the Jews adopted about the 5th century B.C. Tradition ascribed this change to Ezra; but inscriptions, ostraka and papyri, prove that it was a gradual process which was not completed in Hebrew by 40o B.c. Another form of this hand is found in Egyptian Aramaic in the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. From these were developed the "square" characters used in biblical manuscripts, important texts and most printed books ; the "Rab binic" script, used in every kind of treatise, and the "cursive" writing of letters and informal documents, which was not generally printed. Hebrew palaeography is not sufficiently advanced to determine accurately the date of a manuscript, but the country of its origin can be recognized. The clearest distinctions are be tween Spanish, French, Italian, Maghrebi, Greek, Syrian and Egyptian, Yemenite, Persian and Karaite hands. This alphabet numbered 22 letters, whose order the evidence of certain acrostic poems proves not always to have been precisely that which after wards prevailed ; and there are signs that it was not definitely fixed even when the Greek version of the Old Testament was made. In default of figures the consonants served also as nu merals, of which usage the earliest traces are found on Macca baean coins. On these, too, abbreviations, which are unknown in the Old Testament but are extremely common afterwards, make their first appearance.
could denote u and i, while ' ('aleph) sometimes marked a and more rarely o, and h supported various final vowels ; the first two also indicated the diphthongs au (o) and ai (e). In inscriptions these helping consonants were rarely written and were inserted in the Scriptures only by later scholars, often wrongly. That this alphabet was imperfect, apart from the absence of vowels, is evident ; for, firstly, the versions prove that h and ` (`ayin) each represented a harder and a softer sound, which Arabic distin guishes by diacritical points; secondly, the Masoretes inserted a point in b, g, d, k, p and t, to distinguish their unaspirated from their aspirated sounds. Yet it was over-rich in the possession of five sibilants: z, a strongly articulated s, two forms of s which were so alike that one of them almost fell into desuetude, and sh.
the words were divided by a point ; but this was not so on gems and coins, and separation of the words was probably irregular in early manuscripts of the Scriptures ; for the versions not infre quently imply a different division. It seems, however, to have been completed, like the introduction of special final forms of k, m, n, p and c, before the time of the Masoretes. As Hebrew became ever more the language solely of the learned, the need of preserving the original pronunciation in the reading of the Scrip tures was increasingly felt ; for this the vowel-less text was a very imperfect instrument. The insertion of w and y'
and lz to mark long vowels and diphthongs was the first step; that of '
and h was very early; but, since the Greek version often implies a reading without such a w or y, they had probably not been generally introduced even after the and century B.C. The system of vowels found in modern Bibles was a much later invention, having been gradually developed by Jewish grammarians in the 6th and 7th centuries A.D., imitating the Syriac vocaliza tion. Two main systems were invented : the Babylonian with mostly supra-linear signs, and the Palestinian, in which they were chiefly put under the line. The Palestinian, as elaborated by the scholars of Tiberias, is that found in modern Bibles. It was so exact as to show all the vowel-changes occasioned by lengthening, by tone, by gutturals, and so on, which other languages seldom indicate in writing. This vocalization, which was little used except in Bibles, represented the traditional pronunciation observed in reading the Scriptures in synagogues and schools ; but doubts have, on good grounds, been raised whether it represents the true pronunciation of ancient Hebrew. This can be shown by the Assyrian writing of Hebrew names and by the Greek and Latin transcription of Hebrew names and words. Thus "Dibon" (Hebr. Dibhon) should probably be pronounced "Daibon" (Hebr. Daibhon) if the Greek Aaui3wv is to be trusted. (See GREEK
