Evolution of the Hebrew Language?

[JL Vaughn]

I thought I'd try a little experiment and see if I can demonstrate evidence of evolution of the language in the Old Testament.

Basically, if the history books of Scripture were written during the time period discussed in the text and language evolved over time, then it should be fairly easy to show. If Moses wrote Exodus, for example, and evolution of the language is true, and has been preserved in the Hebrew we have today, then the size of the vocabulary in Exodus should be smaller than the size of the vocabulary in Ezra, for example.

However. if the Documentary Hypothesis is correct, then the entire Old Testament history from Genesis to Esther was written by similarly educated people from the same period of time and should use approximately the same size vocabulary. The null result.

I can think of several other reasons for a null result. Each revision of the language was incorporated into the existing text. Moses was highly educated, so his exceptional language skills mask any actual change in the language over time. The language did not evolve.

But I can't think of any other reasons for a significant positive result, that the size of the vocabulary has changed over time.

Any thoughts?

Does anyone know if this has been done before?

I am planning to use Strong's Numbers as surrogates for the actual Hebrew words. What problems will this cause?

Blessings.

JL

[James Gibbons]

Cool. Keep us posted.

[Rey Reynoso]

Sounds like a pretty good study and should spend some worthy hours sweating over it. Can't wait to see what you get out of it. I don't know off hand of anyone that's done this specific thing before although a google search has a bunch of people getting into the workings of Ancient Hebrew vocabulary.

Off top, I see two problems with using Strong's.

One is that it really doesn't show if a word has an Aramaic root. So let's say you get a vocab count that's smaller than in Ezra which gives you a positive result of evolution of language. Yet if you go with the original language you discover a bunch of words in the earlier books you notice most of the vocabulary is heavily influenced with Aramaic root words where as Ezra was partially written in Aramaic. That should give a null result but the vocabulary is still narrower in Moses than in Ezra.

Two is that it really doesn't show if the way of writing a word is different. So let's say you get a null result in the Torah versus the later Prophets (that the vocabulary usage is the same--I doubt it, but hypothetically speaking) but you look at the text on parchment or Gramcord or something like that and you start to see that the words, although the same, were written differently in Moses than they were in the Ezras that starts changing the result to Language evolution. I guess the same thing would apply by seeing increased usage of specific vowels or something like that.

So if you had a way to track the words that are also influenced by Aramaic and a way to track a difference in letters that would also help in the study.

Documentary Hypothesis though would likely argue that of course there'd be semantic shift since that's their whole argument of looking at later redaction in the earlier books. They'd probably say something like a source document with later additions and reworking but still maintaining that same source. I never understood how they explain why it flows so smoothly, but whatever.

[Rayner Markley]

If Hebrew is a natural language, then of course it changed over time. Language changes in a natural process caused by development of the society and technology, contact with foreign languages, and imperfect transmission to the next generation. I'm not sure that 'size of vocabulary' alone will prove anything other than cultural development. What we need to find is change in the meaning or pronunciation of words.

Hebrew is considered to be related to other Western Canaanite languages. Apparently, Abraham's descendants picked it up in Canaan. If they then spent 400 years in Egypt, the language must show some Egyptian influence, particularly the writings by Moses, who never set foot in Canaan.

Good luck with your study, JL. I'm much interested in this topic.

[JL Vaughn]

Rayner,

That's beyond my abilities. Besides, others have done more difficult analyses and not had any impact on the discussion. I'm hoping for something simple, overlooked, and irrefutable.

I finished gathering the data. Now to see about the analysis.

Blessings.