Post-Exilic Hebrew Linguistic Developments In Esther: A Diachronic Approach -- By: Ronald L. Bergey

Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 31:2 (Jun 1988)
Article: Post-Exilic Hebrew Linguistic Developments In Esther: A Diachronic Approach
Author: Ronald L. Bergey


Post-Exilic Hebrew Linguistic Developments In Esther:
A Diachronic Approach

Ronald L. Bergey*

No consensus has been reached concerning the book of Esther’s position in the linguistic milieu of post-exilic Biblical Hebrew (or Late Biblical Hebrew, LBH). Robert Polzin maintains that the language in Esther is archaized—that is, imitative of pre-exilic Biblical Hebrew (or Early Biblical Hebrew, EBH)—and that it differs considerably from Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah’s non-memoir portions.1 Carey Moore drew an opposite conclusion: “The Hebrew of Esther is most like that of the Chronicler.”2 Still another view is posited by Chaim Rabin: “In the somewhat later Book of Esther, we find that MH [Mishnaic Hebrew]3 has affected much more deeply the grammatical fabric, so much so that it is almost as correct to speak of a MH text with BH influence as of a BH text with MH influence.”4

What this lack of consensus indicates is that the language in Esther—as is analogically the case in language in general—possesses linguistic heterogeneity.5 Overall the post-exilic composition, Esther, should be viewed as a composite of linguistic features diachronically shared in EBH and MH and elements synchronically typical of LBH. In other words, analyses of the language in Esther disclose that there are some grammatical and lexical

*Ronald Bergey is associate professor of Hebrew and Old Testament at Western Reformed Seminary in Tacoma, Washington.

features that are shared with EBH, others that characterize LBH, and some that anticipate MH (i.e. Tannaitic Hebrew). This is not to say, however, that late linguistic elements in Esther are indiscernible from the earlier features.

The purpose of this paper is to present five LBH linguistic changes that appear in the book of Esther.6 In order to ferret out diachronic or LBH developments, the complementary controls of linguistic contrast and distribution are employed.7 Linguistic contrast displays the grammatical and lexical substitutions found in similar language contexts between sources of the same language of two or more periods.8 Linguistic distribution probes the propensity of the substitution. By employment of these complementary controls the distinctions between EBH and LBH are disclosed and the degree of penetrati...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()