The Morphology of the Biblical Root h-b-q: A Diachronic Analysis.

• Author: Samet, Nili

This paper discusses the stem variance of the root h-b-q in the Bible, suggesting that its inconsistent conjugation does not reflect the original Biblical Hebrew, but rather results from an anachronistic pronunciation created by the Masoretes. The paper reviews the research of Masoretic anachronisms and the methodologies developed to identify them, applying these to the case of the root h-b-q. It concludes that h-b-q belongs to a specific type of Masoretic anachronism, in which original Qal forms were misvocalized by the Masoretes as Piel under the influence of Mishnaic Hebrew. After presenting biblical and extra-biblical evidence to support this conclusion, the paper briefly discusses some of its main implications for the diachronic study of ancient Hebrew: the "late spelling paradox," the scope of the phenomenon of substituting Piel for Qal, and the relation between Masoretic anachronisms and the scholarly debate about the linguistic reliability of the Masoretic text.

The root p"3n "embrace" occurs fifteen times in the Bible. Twelve of these incidences are in the Piel stem, as follows:

He embraced him and kissed him. (Gen. 29:13)

He embraced him and fell on his neck. (Gen. 33:4)

[phrase omitted]

He kissed them and embraced them. (Gen. 48:10)

[phrase omitted]

They are wet with the showers of the mountains, and embrace the rock for lack of shelter. (Job 24:8)

[phrase omitted]

Exalt her to you and she will promote you; she will bring you honor if you embrace her. (Prov. 4:8)

[phrase omitted]

Why be infatuated, my son, with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger? (Prov. 5:20)

[phrase omitted]

A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest. (Prov. 6:10; var. Prov. 24:33)

[phrase omitted]

His left hand is under my head, and his right hand embraces me. (Song of Sol. 2:6; var.

Song 8:3)

[phrase omitted]

A time to embrace and a time to shun embracing. (Eccles. 3:5)

[phrase omitted]

Those who were brought up in scarlet embrace dunghills. (Lam. 4:5)

Only three occurrences are in the Qal:

[phrase omitted]

At this season and at this time next year, you shall embrace a son. (2 Kings 4:16)

[phrase omitted]

A time to embrace and a time to shun embracing. (Eccles. 3:5)

[phrase omitted]

The fool folds his hands and eats his own flesh. (Eccles. 4:5)

The stem variance appears arbitrary. The Qal means simply "embrace"--or, idiomatically, "fold the hands." The Piel carries the same sense, adding no new nuance or connotation to the basic meaning expressed by the Qal. Thus, both Proverbs (6:10, 24:33) and Ecclesiastes (4:5) condemn the lazy person who folds his hands: the notion is identical, but Proverbs uses the Piel pan while Qohelet employs the Qal pan. Another striking example of this problem appears in Ecclesiastes 3:5: "A time to embrace and a time to shun embracing." Precisely the same action is indicated here first by the Qal piarj and then the Piel pan. Scholars have attempted to explain this diversity of stems in various ways. Some suggest that the variance represents poetic variation or sonority.' Others claim a slight semantic difference between the two forms--an argument unsupported by the context. (2)

I would like to suggest that the inconsistent conjugation of the root p"an in the Bible does not reflect the original Biblical Hebrew. Rather it is the result of an anachronistic pronunciation imposed on an originally harmonic system by the Masoretic scribes. To clarify this point, I shall first briefly review the current state of research regarding Masoretic and proto-Masoretic anachronisms, focusing on the methodology whereby they are identified.

ANACHRONISTIC MASORETIC VOCALIZATION

The presence of anachronistic vocalizations in the Masoretic text has been recognized since the nineteenth century. (3) These are cases where the Masoretic vocalization (especially the Tiberian) reflects a pronunciation that accords with post-biblical pronunciation, or-more specifically--with typical Second Temple Hebrew pronunciation. While these anachronisms appear to have been created by Second Temple scribes, we only learn of them through the much later medieval vocalization system. (4) For the sake of convenience, I shall refer to anachronistic vocalizations as (proto-)Masoretic anachronisms, and to their creators as (proto)-Masoretes, thus allowing for different assumptions regarding time and origin.

Various examples of (proto-)Masoretic anachronisms have been identified, in both nominal and verbal forms. (5) Among these, the most prominent group of anachronisms involves stem confusion.

A key method in identifying stem confusions regards the relation between the consonantal text and its vocalization. Scholars assume that the (proto-)Masoretes enforced late readings on the consonantal text only when the latter allowed it. However, when the consonantal text forced them to follow the earlier reading, they submitted to its dictates. For instance, the Qal perfect [phrase omitted] suggests the existence of an original imperfect [phrase omitted]*. AS the Qal gradually lost its intransitive meaning to the Nifal, speakers discarded the [phrase omitted] pattern and began using [phrase omitted] instead. In the Hebrew language as it was known to the (proto-)Masoretes, this process had already been completed: [phrase omitted] replaced [phrase omitted] and [phrase omitted]...