Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Review: מילון חדש למקרא

Reviewed Work: Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros by Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner
Review by: יהושע בלאו , Y. Blau
Tarbiẕ / תרביץ
כרך כה‎, חוברת ג‎ (ניסן תשט"ז), pp. 359-362
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23587985
Page Count: 4
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
מילון חדש למקרא
Preview not available

Abstract

This dictionary may be considered as a continuation of the work of Gesenius in its various editions, and especially of the last two recensions of that work which have appeared — namely, the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford, 1907) and the Gesenius-Buhl Hebräisches und aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament (Lepzig, 1915). A review of the present volume, therefore, must take into account these previous two and the high standard of scholarship which underlies them. Koehler's dictionary of Biblical Hebrew fails to meet these high standards; despite its strong points, it does not measure up to its predecessors with respect either to philological accuracy and elaboration, or to bibliographical comprehensiveness, and beyond this its judgments often are less convincing. Especially disappointing is the fact that the utilization of Mishnaic Hebrew and of Jewish-Aramaic has not been carried forward; on the contrary, it is sometimes less in evidence than in the previous works (comp, s. v. dfy, dlf, dlg, bzq, dema). Even more surprising is the way the author has used the Ugaritic material, without doubt the most important single source for Biblical lexicons which has been discovered since the publication of the afore-mentioned dictionaries; dictionaries; st, bsqlwn, and dmm (the latter in the sense of "to cry") are not entered, Heb. šulhāṅ is connected with Ar. salakha, yāšān with Ar. asina/wasina, and חצבתי (Hos. VI, 5) is emended to הצבתי. In other places the author's treatment is not satisfactory: there is no consistency in his treatment of qōteb / dārebān = "thorn" or concerning the question whether hū indeed serves as a copula, bth in the sense of "to fall" is missing, dlq is compared to Ar. dhaliqa despite the difference in the vocalics, etc. On the other hand, the second part of the book — Baumgartner's dictionary of Biblical Aramaic — meets the high standards referred to. Because the material at hand is limited, it is especially important in a Biblical Aramaic lexicon to introduce parallels from all the Semitic languages, and from Aramaic in particular (cf. Baumgartner's illuminating introduction, p. XXXV ff.). This the author has done systematically and in a very thorough manner., so that the Aramaic dictionary presents us with the essence of the material at hand and guides us with sound judgment.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[359]
    [359]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
360
    360
  • Thumbnail: Page 
361
    361
  • Thumbnail: Page 
362
    362