However, the use of the pronouns ותוא and םתוא as independent demonstrative pronouns is first documented in a Hebrew text only in the Palestinian Amoraic period, some five hundred years later, and is completely absent from Tannaitic Hebrew (see fn. Joosten argues that this translation reflects the influence of the spoken Hebrew of the period of the translators, in which ותוא already served as an independent demonstrative pronoun. 33.8 the place name א ֵ֔ ת ָ ם is translated αὐτοὶ ‘they themselves’. 6.13, the object pronoun in the phrase י ָ ב ִ֣ אי א ֹ֔ ת ֹ ו ‘one shall bring him’ is translated as αὐτός ‘he himself’.

The meaning of the phrase would thus be ‘and its entrance on the day.’ 6ĨJan Joosten (2002, 14–16) has noted two verses where the Septuagint documents the independent demonstrative pronoun ותוא. If their reading is correct, we should probably parse the word התיאמ as an infinitive form of the root תא ' י, potentially in the function of a verbal noun. Alexey Yuditsky and Elisha Qimron kindly alerted me that the words should be read as] מו ֯ יא ֯ הת ויב ֯[ אמ. But the conventional reading may be wrong. However, Beyer (1984, 258 ,506) interprets it as a loan from Hebrew א ֹ תו ‘sign’, which Cook (2015, 4) regards as the better explanation. Józef Milik suggested that this shift may be seen in a disjointed fragment from an Aramaic astronomical work found at Qumran. Re (.)ħThe shift from אוהה to ותוא is completely undocumented prior to Mishnaic Hebrew-whether in the Bible or in the documents from the Judaean Desert.

6 Compare the infinitive forms of this root in Qumran Aramaic למאתה, למתא ,למתה (Beyer 1984, 525).

The elders of that city washed their hands in water at the place where the heifer’s neck was broken.’ (Mishna, Soṭa ‘The elders of that city brought a heifer from the herd which had not been wrought with and which had not drawn in the yoke… and they brought it down unto a rugged valley… 21.3–6 KJV)ĥWhereas the text in the Mishnah reads: (3)

‘And it shall be, that the city which is next unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take an heifer, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley… And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley.’ (Deut. A good example of the shift that occurred between Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew can be seen when we compare the wording of the law of ʿegla ʿarufa ‘the heifer with a broken neck’ in the Bible and its Mishnaic presentation. 4ĤThis paper is devoted to the use of the inflected form ותוא as a demonstrative modifier. I should note here that, in terms of syntactic function, the respective Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew pronouns אוהה and ותוא usually express anaphora or identity, and are not used as independent indicative pronouns (as distinct from their proximal counterparts). 4 See Oron (1990, 28–30) Kaddari (1991, 212–13) Azar (1995, 212– 13) Breuer (2002, 212).ģ(b) The form of the direct object marker that is inflected with third person pronominal suffixes ( ןתוא, התוא, ותוא 3) replaces the distal demonstrative modifying pronoun ( םהה, איהה, אוהה ) in Biblical Hebrew.3 The masculine and feminine forms merged into one form (אותן) because of the phonetic shift (under c (.).

Dual lingo hebrew