Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKoller, Aaron
dc.date.accessioned2019-06-27T17:40:27Z
dc.date.available2019-06-27T17:40:27Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citationKoller, Aaron. (2013). Ancient Hebrew מעצד and עצד in the Gezer Calendar. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 72(2), 179-193.en_US
dc.identifier.issn022-2968
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/671444en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://doi.org/10.1086/671444en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12202/4440
dc.descriptionScholarly articleen_US
dc.description.abstract(From conclusion): To summarize, therefore, it has been seen that the Hebrew noun מעצד refers to the “adze” throughout the history of ancient Hebrew: it is found twice in the Hebrew Bible, in relatively unrevealing contexts, and often in rabbinic literature, in contexts that make the identification clear. Hebrew is unique among the Semitic languages in having a noun from the root עצד which refers to a carpentry tool; in other languages, cognates refer to agricultural tools and other cutting tools, but not to the tools of the carpenter. Although the literary corpus of Hebrew (Biblical through Mishnaic) does not contain any attestations of the verbal root עצד , this root is attested in the Gezer calendar. Since flax ( פשת ) is “uprooted” rather than “cut,” however, the use of עצד in the Gezer calendar does not match the data regarding the semantics of the root within Hebrew. Instead, I have suggested the connection of Gezer’s עצד with Aramaic חצד , and posit that in the dialect of the scribe, the ע and the ח were indistinguishable, at least in some contexts.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipA very early form of some of these ideas was subjected to the critical eye of Richard C. Steiner. A rough draft of the paper was read and thoroughly (and appropriately) criticized by Elitzur Avraham Bar-Asher, to whom I owe a large debt of gratitude, and a later, but still undeveloped, draft was much improved by the comments and advice of Shawn Zelig Aster. At a later stage, Gary Rendsburg attentively read the paper and provided me with valuable feedback and critical comments. Further criticisms and suggestions came from Seth Sanders, who forced me to clarify certain statements and lines of the argument, and finally, an anonymous reviewer for JNES challenged some of the basic points in ways which led me to reformulate and sharpen the arguments in what are hopefully more convincing ways. Flaws that remain are likely due to my failure to take the advice of these scholars on some point or another.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherThe University of Chicagoen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of Near Eastern Studies;72(2)
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectverbsen_US
dc.subjectcutting toolsen_US
dc.subjectscribesen_US
dc.subjectAdzesen_US
dc.subjectnounsen_US
dc.subjectwordsen_US
dc.subjectartisansen_US
dc.subjectlexicographyen_US
dc.subjectagricultureen_US
dc.titleAncient Hebrew מעצד and עצד in the Gezer Calendar.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States