Volume V, DIVISION V: RESEARCH PROJECTS-REPORTS AND ARTICLES BASED ON THE PROJECTS' FINDINGS; JEWISH DEMOGRAPHY / כרך ה, חטיבה ה: מפעלי מחקר בתחום מדעי היהדות: דינים-וחשבונות ומאמרים מדעיים, המבוססים על תוצאות מפעלי המחקר; מאמרים בדמוגרפיה יהודית‎ || ABSTRACTS OF ARTICLES IN THE HEBREW SECTION

  • View
    219

  • Download
    7

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

  • World Union of Jewish Studies /

    ABSTRACTS OF ARTICLES IN THE HEBREW SECTIONSource: Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies / Volume V, DIVISION V: RESEARCH PROJECTS-REPORTS AND ARTICLES ,, BASED ON THE PROJECTS' FINDINGS; JEWISH DEMOGRAPHY / , : : - , ; pp. 55-77 " / 1969Published by: World Union of Jewish Studies / Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23524095 .Accessed: 09/06/2014 18:24

    Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

    .JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

    .

    World Union of Jewish Studies / is collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies /

    http://www.jstor.org

    This content downloaded from 188.72.96.193 on Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:24:24 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

    http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=wujshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/23524095?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

  • ABSTRACTS OF ARTICLES

    IN THE HEBREW SECTION

    This content downloaded from 188.72.96.193 on Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:24:24 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

    http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

  • ON THE CHRONOLOGY OF AN ARTICLE IN THE

    HISTORICAL DICTIONARY

    Z. Ben-Hayyim, Jerusalem

    The major task of a historical language dictionary is to provide the

    biography of each dictionary item from its first appearance in the

    language, in written form, until the closing of the dictionary. The task calls for the existence of all the appropriate records, extracted from the

    sources, in the hands of the editors. Connected with this is the necessity for a precise placement of the items in chronological order, so that an

    early form of the work will always precede later forms, The difficulty with a timetable applies particularly to the early period in the Hebrew

    language, defined as the era from the end of the Biblical until the end of the Gaonic age (approximately 1050 A.D.), wherein the lexicographer and the historian of the language find it difficult to pinpoint the exact time location of a particular source. One reason is the fact that the sources

    from which the dictionary items are derived often could be attributed to different periods.

    An example is the material taken from the Tannaitic literature placed in the dictionary under period 0-300) A.D.) but quoted in the Talmud im (the ), a literary source placed under period 300-600)

    A.D.). The question therefore is the correct chronological placement suitable for an item taken from the .

    For the purposes of the lexicographer and the historian a distinction was made between three kinds of 1 :. The first type are

    which appear in the Talmudim in the same form as in a

    Tannaitic source. 2. which have their parallels in the Tan

    naitic sources but are linguistically and stylistically different versions

    of the same thing. 3. which are the sole source for the Tannai

    tic expression. The differentiation allows several ways of treatment. A quotation of

    the first kind can be placed within the fourth chronological period, and, in cases of changes they can be presented as variae lectiones (by the citat

    ion of the sources and the period ) Quotations falling under the second

    and third categories should be catalogued in period , even though the

    material comes from the Tannaitic period since linguistically it

    cannot be attributed with certainty to the period . And by this rule the

    of the Amoraim fail to present a special chronological

    problem for the dictionary.

    57

    This content downloaded from 188.72.96.193 on Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:24:24 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

    http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

  • 58 ABSTRACTS

    The above suggestion still leaves some chronological difficulties

    standing. The paper shows how at times a later source (for example the Talmud versus a Tannatic source) preserves a linguistic form or an

    ancient expression in contrast to what is presented by even earlier sources, whose manuscripts failed to maintain the original form. The very deter

    mination of what is early or late in matters of language development of expression can be sometimes done by external sources only.

    And therefore, in order to present the historical evolution correctly,

    according to standards and opinions acceptable in linguistic research, the suggestion is here made to add, whenever necessary, a special rubric

    'historical evaluation' of the material for a given item.

    PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PREPARATION

    OF DICTIONARY MATERIAL ON THE BASIS OF

    MANUSCRIPTS

    I. Yeivin, Jerusalem

    The work of transcribing material gathered for the Historical Diction

    ary of the Hebrew language of the Hebrew Language Academy is done

    according to manuscripts rather than printed material. In this the task is

    similar to that of a text editor who also works according to manuscripts. There are, however, two differences between him and the editor of a

    dictionary. The editor of a text treats the work as a whole, but generally such works are not homogeneous. In most cases the version is ecclectic,

    requiring corrections and completions which are done on the basis of other manuscripts. The dictionary editor deals with a citation only within its context, i.e. a passage. The passage must be homogeneous. Only thus is it listed under the title of one source and one manuscript. Secondly, the text editor is interested in the whole work and would like to present it to the reader in its completeness. The editor of a dictionary is more

    likely to be satisfied with a selection from it, which seems to him impor tant to represent the language of this work or of its period.

    This type of approach to manuscripts determines several matters in the working method.

    1. The manuscripts on which the work of the dictionary is based, while in general containing words or forms more ancient than those found in printed material, are generally in worse condition, full of material defects (torn or unclear) and bearing traces of corrections done by dif

    This content downloaded from 188.72.96.193 on Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:24:24 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

    http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

  • ABSTRACTS 59

    ferent readers. Therefore the text which is the base of the dictionary work exhibits signs of deterioration, letters which are difficult to decipher, additions made by correctors, etc., and in general is less clear than the

    printed version.

    2. Usually the dictionary editor does not add completions, corrections

    and such to the final version, even if there are deletions and errors. The

    reason is that if additions were written into the text, on the basis of

    other manuscripts or personal judgment, the uniqueness of the passage would be undermined, since a passage which contains secondary additions

    on the basis of other manuscripts is no longer homogeneous. Even in cases where all the manuscripts of a source are damaged

    such as in the Piyyutim or the Midrashim from the Geniza, which are

    preserved in fragmented manuscripts, for the purposes of the dictionary each version of a manuscript is transcribed by itself, and the versions

    are located next to each other. The dictionary editor does not compile one version out of two or more different transmissions, since in such a

    compilation the passages would lack uniformity. 3. When working on the transcription of the varia lectiones, after a

    certain passage was recorded according to one manuscript, and in ano

    ther manuscript there is an important variation to one or more words

    of the main passage, the dictionary worker does not insert this variation

    into the passage, since in such a method the passage will no longer be

    homogeneous, as it will contain words copied from two (or more)

    manuscripts. The variations are transcribed in the dictionary work as

    independent homogeneous passages, which are located next to the main

    passage, but contain a context of their own, according to the manuscript and from which this variation was transcribed.

    RESEARCH IN THE VOCABULARY OF MODERN

    HEBREW LITERATURE

    R. Mirkin, Jerusalem

    Research in the vocabulary of modern Hebrew literature (from 1750 till

    today) began in February 1969. By June 1972 fifty-nine sources were

    examined thoroughly, containing 760,000 words, and seven additional

    sources are being processed currently, with 150,000 works in them.

    The material includes all types of literature: pure fiction, scientific public

    ations, the press, Hassidic literature, publicism, letters, etc.

    This content downloaded from 188.72.96.193 on Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:24:24 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

    http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

  • 60 ABSTRACTS

    One of the sources whose examination has been completed is the

    first Hebrew story of Shalo