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.If there's a term you'd like included, please EMail me. Allegorical interpretation is a product of the interpreter, rather than a property of the text itself; scholars often debate whether a particular text was intended by its original author to be read allegorically.For some specific examples of how scholarly and everyday terms differ, see also my Biblical Studies - Scholarly Terminology page. For example, Galatians -31 interprets OT story of Abraham's two sons Ishmael and Isaac allegorically, representing Mount Sinai and Jerusalem respectively, slave and free.Sponsored Products are advertisements for products sold by merchants on When you click on a Sponsored Product ad, you will be taken to an Amazon detail page where you can learn more about the product and purchase it.
Add this item and .75 to your cart to get free shipping.
The study critically examines some linguistic arguments adduced to support the traditional position, and reviewing the arguments it points to weaknesses in the linguistic dating of EBH texts to pre-exilic times.
When viewing the linguistic evidence in isolation it will be clear that a post-exilic date for the (final linguistic form of the) EBH texts is more likely.
This slender monograph is a revision of a Yale University Ph. dissertation (2011) written under the supervision of Robert R. The catalyst for the research was the decade-long (and continuing) debate between Avi Hurvitz and other consensus scholars or traditionalists on the one hand and Ian Young, Martin Ehrensvärd, myself, and other challengers on the other, regarding the possibility of determining the dates of origin of Biblical Hebrew (BH) writings on the basis of their linguistic characteristics (pp. Aside from the standard front and back matters, the body of the book has six chapters.
Chapter 1 ( Introduction) introduces the problem ( Can we date biblical texts [to the preexilic vs.