HEBREW GRAMMAR
INTRODUCTION
§ 1. The Semitic Languages in General.
B. Stade, Lehrb. der hebr. Gramm., Lpz. 1879, § 2 ff.; E. König, Hist.-krit. Lehrgeb. der hebr. Spr., i. Lpz. 1881, § 3; H. Strack, Einl. in das A. T., 6th ed., Munich, 1906, p. 231 ff. (a good bibliography of all the Semitic dialects); Th. Nöldeke, article 'Semitic Languages', in the 9th ed. of the Encycl. Brit. (Die semit. Sprachen, 2nd ed., Lpz. 1899), and Beitr. zur sem. Sprachwiss., Strassb., 1904; W. Wright, Lectures on the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages, Cambr. 1890; H. Reckendorf, 'Zur Karakteristik der sem. Sprachen,' in the Actes du Xme Congrès internat. des Orientalistes (at Geneva in 1894), iii. I ff., Leiden, 1896; O.E. Lindberg, Vergl. Gramm.der sem. Sprachen, i A: Konsonantismus, Gothenburg, 1897; H. Zimmern, Vergl. Gramm. der sem. Sprachen, Berlin, 1898; E. König, Hebräisch und Semitisch: Prolegomena und Grundlinien einer Gesch. der sem. Sprachen, &c., Berlin, 1901; C. Brockelmann. Semitische Sprachwissenschaft, Lpz. 1906, Grundriss der vergl. Gramm. der sem. Sprachen, vol. i (Laut- und Formenlehre), parts 15, Berlin, 1907 f. and his Kurzgef. vergleichende Gramm. (Porta Ling. Or.) Berlin, 1908. The material contained in inscriptions has been in process of collection since 1881 in the Paris Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum. To this the best introductions are M. Lidzbarski's Handbuch der Nordsem. Epigraphik, Weimar, 1898, in 2 parts (text and plates), and his Ephemeris zur sem. Epigraphik (5 parts published), Giessen, 1900 f. [G. A. Cooke, Handbook of North-Semitic Inscriptions, Oxford, 1903].
I. The South Semitic or Arabic branch. To this belong, besides the classical literary language of the Arabs and the modern vulgar Arabic, the older southern Arabic preserved in the Sabaean inscriptions (less correctly called Himyaritic), and its offshoot, the Ge‘ez or Ethiopic, in Abyssinia.
II. The Middle Semitic or Canaanitish branch. To this belongs the Hebrew of the Old Testament with its descendants, the New Hebrew, as found especially in the Mishna (see below, § 3 a), and Rabbinic; also Phoenician, with Punic (in Carthage and its colonies), and the various remains of Canaanitish dialects preserved in names of places and persons, and in the inscription of
For further particulars about the remains of Western Aramaic (including those in the New Test., in the Palmyrene and Egyptian Aramaic inscriptions) see Kautzsch, Gramm. des Biblisch-Aramäischen, Lpz. 1884, p. 6 ff.
On the importance of Assyrian for Hebrew philology especially from a lexicographical point of view cf. Friedr. Delitzsch, Prolegomena eines neuen hebr.-aram. Wörterbuchs zum A. T., Lpz. 1886; P. Haupt, 'Assyrian Phonology, &c.,' in Hebraica, Chicago, Jan. 1885, vol. i. 3; Delitzsch, Assyrische Grammatik, 2nd ed., Berlin, 1906.
If the above division into four branches be reduced to two principal groups, No. I, as South Semitic, will be contrasted with the three North Semitic branches.5
All these languages stand to one another in much the same relation as those of the Germanic family (Gothic, Old Norse, Danish, Swedish; High and Low German in their earlier and later dialects), or as the Slavonic languages (Lithuanian, Lettish; Old Slavonic, Serbian, Russian; Polish, Bohemian). They are now either wholly extinct, as the Phoenician and Assyrian, or preserved only in a debased form, as Neo-Syriac among Syrian Christians and Jews in Mesopotamia and Kurdistan, Ethiopic ( e
Geºez ) in the later Abyssinian dialects (TigreÖ, Tigrinîa , Amharic), and Hebrew among some modern Jews, except in so far as they attempt a purely literary reproduction of the language of the Old Testament. Arabic alone has not only occupied to this day its original abode in Arabia proper, but has also forced its way in all directions into the domain of other languages.
The Semitic family of languages is bounded on the East and North by another of still wider extent, which reaches from India to the western limits of Europe, and is called Indo-Germanic6 since it comprises, in the most varied ramifications, the Indian (Sanskrit), Old and New Persian, Greek, Latin, Slavonic, as well as Gothic and the other Germanic languages. With the Old Egyptian language, of which Coptic is a descendant, as well as with the languages of north-western Africa, the Semitic had from the earliest times much in common, especially in grammatical structure; but on the other hand there are fundamental differences between them, especially from a lexicographical point of view; see Erman, 'Das Verhältnis des Aegyptischen zu den semitischen Sprachen,' in the ZDMG. xlvi, 1892, p. 93 ff., and Brockelmann, Grundriss, i. 3.
Comp, Friedr. Delitzsch, Studien über indogermanisch-semitische Wurzelverwandtschaft, Lpz. 1873; Nöldechen, Semit. Glossen zu Fick und Curtius, Magdeb. 1876 f; McCurdy, Aryo-Semitic Speech, Andover, U. S. A, 1881. The phonetic relations have been thoroughly investigated by H. Möller in Semitisch und Indogermanisch, Teil i, Konsonanten, Copenhagen and Lpz. 1907, a work which has evoked considerable criticism.
As onomatopoetic words, or as stem-sounds of a similar character, we may compare, e. g. h
qq;l', %x;l' ,lei,cw , lingo, Skt. lih, Eng. to lick, Fr. lécher, Germ. lecken;ll;G" (cf.lg:a'Ã lg:[' )kuli,w , volvo, Germ. quellen, wallen, Eng. to well;dr;G"Ã jr;x'Ã tr;x' cara,ttw , Pers. khaÆriÆdan, Ital. grattare, Fr. gratter, Eng. to grate, to scratch, Germ. kratzen;qr;P' frango, Germ. brechen, &c.; Reuss, Gesch. der hl. Schriften A.T.'s, Braunschw. 1881, p. 38. draws attention moreover to the Semitic equivalents for earth, six, seven, horn, to sound, to measure, to mix, to smell, to place, clear, to kneel, raven, goat, ox, &c. An example of a somewhat different kind is am, ham (sam), gam, kam, in the sense of the German samt, zusammen, together; in Hebrew~m;a' (whencehM'au people, properly assembly),~[i (with) samt,~G: also, moreover, Arab.[mG to collect; Pers. ham, hamah (at the same time); Skt.samaÖ (with) , Gk.a[ma ¿a;mfwÀ( o`mo,j( o`mou/ ¿o[muloj( o[madojÀ , and harderkoino,j , Lat. cum, cumulus, cunctus; with the corresponding sibilant Skt. sam, Gk.su,n( xu,n( xuno,j =koino,j , Goth. sama, Germ. samt, sammeln; but many of these instances are doubtful.
(a) In Hebrew: some names of objects which were originally indigenous in babylonia and Assyria (see a comprehensive list of Assyrio- babylonian loan-words in the Hebrew and Aramaic of the Old Testament in Zimmern and Winckler, KAT.3, ii. p. 648 ff.), in Egypt, Persia, or India, e. g.raoy> (also in the plural) river, from Egyptian yoor, generally as the name of the Nile (late Egypt. yaro, Assyr. yaru'u), although it is possible that a pure Semiticray has been confounded with the Egyptian name of the Nile (so Zimmern);Wxa'ñ (Egyptian) Nile-reed (see Lieblein, 'Mots-égyptiens dans la Bible,' in PSBA. 1898, p. 202 f.);sDer>P; (in ZendpairidaeÖza , circumvallation =para,deisoj ) pleasure garden, park;!AKr>d;a] daric, Persian gold coin;~yYIKiT peacocks, perhaps from the MalabartoÖgai ortoÖghai . Some of these words are also found in Greek, assP;r>K; (Pers.karbaÖs , Skt.karpaÖsa ) cotton,ka,rpasoj , carbasus. On the other hand it is doubtful if@Aq corresponds to the Greekkh/poj( kh/boj , Skt. kapi, ape.
(b) In Greek, &c.: some originally Semitic names of Asiatic products and articles of commerce, e. g.#WB bu,ssoj , byssus;hn"bol. li,banoj( libanwto,j , incense;hn<q' ka,nh( ka,nna , canna, cane;!MoK; ku,munon , cuminum, cumin;h['yciq. kassi,a , cassia;lm'G" ka,mhloj , camelus;!Abr'[e avrrabw,n , arrhabo, arrha, pledge. Such transitions have perhaps been brought about chiefly by Phoenician trade. Cf. A. Müller, 'Semitische Lehnworte im älteren Griechisch,' in Bezzenberger's Beiträge zur Kunde der Indo-germ. Sprachen, Göttingen, 1877, vol. i. p. 273 ff.; E. Ries, Quae res et vocabula a gentibus semiticis in Graeciam pervenerint, Breslau, 1890; Muss-Arnolt, 'Semitic words in Greek and Latin,' in the Transactions of the American Philological Association, xxiii. p. 35 ff.; H. Lewy, Die semitischen Fremdwörter im Griech., Berlin, 1895; J. H. Bondi, Dem hebr.-phöniz. Sprachzweige angehör. Lehnwörter in hieroglyph. u. hieratischen Texten, Lpz. 1886.
With the exception of the Assyrio-Babylonian (cuneiform), all varieties of Semitic writing, although differing widely in some respects, are derived from one and the same original alphabet, represented on extant monuments most faithfully by the characters used on the stele of
See the Table of Alphabets at the beginning of the Grammar, which shows the relations of the older varieties of Semitic writing to one another and especially the origin of the present Hebrew characters from their primitive forms. For a more complete view, see Gesenius‘ Scripturae linguaeque Phoeniciae monumenta, Lips. 1837, 4:to, pt. i. p. 15 ff., and pt. iii. tab. 1–5. From numerous monuments since discovered, our knowledge of the Semitic characters, especially the Phoenician, has become considerably enlarged and more accurate. Cf. the all but exhaustive bibliography (from 1616 to 1896) in Lidzbarski's Handbuch der Nordsemitischen Epigraphik, i. p. 4 ff, and on the origin of the Semitic alphabet, ibid., P.173 ff., and Ephemeris (see the heading of § I a above), i. pp. 109 ff., 142, 261 ff., and his 'Altsemitische Texte', pt. i, Kanaanäische Inschriften (Moabite, Old-Hebrew, Phoenician, Punic), Giessen, 1907. — On the origin and development of the Hebrew characters and the best tables of alphabets, see § 5 a, last note, and especially § 5 e. l
The earliest non-Jewish Aramaic inscriptions known to us are that of
Monuments of the Arabic branch first appear in the earliest centuries A.D. (Sabaean inscriptions, Ethiopic translation of the Bible in the fourth or fifth century, North-Arabic literature from the sixth century A. D.).
It is, however, another question which of these languages has adhered longest and most faithfully to the original character of the Semitic, and which consequently represents to us the earliest phase of its development. For the more or less rapid transformation of the sounds and forms of a language, as spoken by nations and races, is dependent on causes quite distinct from the growth of a literature, and the organic structure of a language is often considerably impaired even before it has developed a literature, especially by early contact with people of a different language. Thus in the Semitic group, the Aramaic dialects exhibit the earliest and greatest decay, next to them the Hebrew-Canaanitish, and in its own way the Assyrian. Arabic, owing to the seclusion of the desert tribes, was the longest to retain the original fullness and purity of the sounds and forms of words.10 Even here, however, there appeared, through the revolutionary influence of Islam, an ever-increasing decay, until Arabic at length reached the stage at which we find Hebrew in the Old Testament.
Hence the phenomenon, that in its grammatical structure the ancient Hebrew agrees more with the modern than with the ancient Arabic, and that the latter, although it only appears as a written language at a later period, has yet in many respects preserved a more complete structure and a more original vowel system than the other Semitic languages, cf. Nöldeke, 'Das klassische Arabisch und die arabischen Dialekte,' in Beiträge zur semitischen Sprachwissenschaft, p. 1 ff. It thus occupies amongst them a position similar to that which Sanskrit holds among the Indo-Germanic languages, or Gothic in the narrower circle of the Germanic. But even the toughest organism of a language often deteriorates, at least in single forms and derivatives, while on the contrary, in the midst of what is other, wise universal decay, there still remains here and there something original and archaic; and this is the case with the Semitic languages. n
Fuller proof of the above statements belongs to the comparative Grammar of the Semitic languages. It follows, however, from what has been said: (1) that the Hebrew language, as found in the sacred literature of the Jews, has, in respect to its organic structure, already suffered more considerable losses than the Arabic, which appears much later on the historical horizon; (2) that, notwithstanding this fact, we cannot at once and in all points concede priority to the latter; (3) that it is a mistake to consider with some that the Aramaic, on account of its simplicity (which is only due to the decay of its organic structure), is the oldest form of Semitic speech.
Footnotes:
1[1] First used by Schlözer in Eichhorn's Repertorium für bibl. u. morgenl. Literatur, 1781, p. 161.
2[2]. From Shem are derived (Gn 10:21 ff.) the Aramaean and Arab families as well as the Hebrews, but not the Canaanites (Phoenicians), who are traced back to Ham (vv. 6, 15 ff.), although their langunge belongs decidedly to what is now called Semitic. The language of the Babylonians and Assyrians also was long ago shown to be Semitic, just as
4[2] In a wider sense all Jewish Aramaic is sometimes called 'Chaldee '.
7[1] So also originally the Ethiopic writing, which afterwards represented the vowels by small appendages to the consonants, or by some other change in their form. On the Assyrio-Babylonian cuneiform writing, which likewise indicates the vowels, see the next note, ad fin.
8[2] The Sabaean (Himyaritic) writing runs occasionally from left to right, and even alternately in both directions (boustrophedon), but as a rule from right to left. In Ethiopic writing the direction from left to right has become the rule; some few old inscriptions exhibit, however, the opposite direction. The cuneiform writing also runs from left to right, but this is undoubtedly borrowed from a non-Semitic people. Cf. § 5 d, note 3.