Comparative & Historical Semitic Linguistics.Part I (draft)

Language Processing and Acquisition in Languages of Semitic, Root-Based, Morphology, 2003

The distinctive character of a Semitic stem is usually identified by the root-andpattern structure, whereby a stem consists of two interdigitated segmental units, a consonantal root and a vocalic pattern. 1 Interdigitation is governed by a prosodic template which determines the syllabic structure of the stem, i.e. the number of syllables, vowel length, and gemination. The vocalic pattern and the prosodic template together form a binyan, which may be accompanied by an affix. This type of word structure appears quite different from the more familiar structure involving morpheme concatenation. Is Semitic morphology indeed so different? Within this volume, which highlights the distinctive aspects of Semitic morphology, I reconsider this question, claiming that the Semitic stem structure is not so peculiar, at least not to the extent that is usually believed. I will show that phonological phenomena constituting evidence for the consonantal root, the vocalic pattern, and the prosodic template in Semitic languages can also be found in non-Semitic languages. I will argue that the difference between Semitic and non-Semitic languages is not a matter of type but rather a matter of degree and combination. The phenomena characterizing Semitic-type morphology, i.e. those which constitute evidence for the consonantal root, the vocalic pattern, and the prosodic template, can be found in other languages but often to a lesser degree. In addition, while each phenomenon can be found in other languages individually, their combination within the same language is not found outside the Semitic family. The discussion is divided into two parts, one concerned with the consonantal root (Section 1) and the other with the binyan (Section 2). Section 1.1 offers a brief review of McCarthy's (1981) structural interpretation of the classical view of the Semitic stem, based primarily on root cooccurrence restrictions. Cooccurrence restrictions in other languages are presented in 1.2 as evidence that in this respect Semitic languages are not unique. Section 1.3 discusses a universal approach to cooccurrence restrictions within the theoretical guidelines of Feature Geometry. Section 2.1 presents the phonological properties identifying a verb in Modern Hebrew, which include the vocalic pattern, the prosodic structure, and prefixes.

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 2019

Scholars of ancient Near Eastern languages traditionally divide the Semitic languages into three major categories, broken down into numerous sub-categories. Hebrew finds a place in this taxonomy but only as a minor offspring of the great family to which it is related. However, to students of the Bible who take it seriously, Hebrew looms largest of them all because to them it was the divinely chosen conduit through which God revealed himself and his purposes for creation and history. One purpose of this paper among others is to justify the inordinate attention paid to this otherwise marginal tongue. Procedurally the paper will (1) survey the origin and development of the Semitic languages and literatures; (2) locate Hebrew within the larger family of the Semitic languages; and (3) engage the issue of the Hebrew language and the biblical text vis-à-vis their literary and larger cultural contexts.