TY - JOUR

T1 - Why biblical texts cannot be dated linguistically

AU - Ehrensvärd, Martin Gustaf

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - The data presented in the article indicate clearly that the ability to write proper EBH did not end with the exile; but when did it end? In the course of the fifth century, or the fourth century, or even later? This is difficult to resolve, on linguistic grounds. On linguistic grounds, can we say that P and parts of Jeremiah are unlikely to stem from, say, the fifth century? No. On linguistic grounds, can we say that redactors and scribes are unlikely to have revised and expanded EBH texts in the centuries following the exile? No. To say that they did not do so would contradict the conventional conclusions of most biblical scholars. Considering only linguistic data, texts in EBH could have been composed after the exile. Other, non-linguistic considerations can make this unlikely, but we can raise no objections from a linguistic viewpoint to such a dating.

AB - The data presented in the article indicate clearly that the ability to write proper EBH did not end with the exile; but when did it end? In the course of the fifth century, or the fourth century, or even later? This is difficult to resolve, on linguistic grounds. On linguistic grounds, can we say that P and parts of Jeremiah are unlikely to stem from, say, the fifth century? No. On linguistic grounds, can we say that redactors and scribes are unlikely to have revised and expanded EBH texts in the centuries following the exile? No. To say that they did not do so would contradict the conventional conclusions of most biblical scholars. Considering only linguistic data, texts in EBH could have been composed after the exile. Other, non-linguistic considerations can make this unlikely, but we can raise no objections from a linguistic viewpoint to such a dating.

M3 - Journal article

VL - 47

SP - 177

EP - 189

JO - Hebrew Studies

JF - Hebrew Studies

SN - 0146-4094

ER -