It will be widely read, cited and, of course, it will raise much debate.
Moreover, it makes a contribution to both research and teaching in these areas.
In that volume, they argued that the two styles of biblical Hebrew usually referred to as Early Biblical Hebrew (EBH) and Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH) are misleading, as is also the case with similar categorizations such as SBH (Standard Biblical Hebrew).
They concluded that these supposedly datable styles of Hebrew were not chronologically separate stages at all, but rather co-existing styles of the language employed by biblical authors as well as scribes throughout the entire biblical period.
The keynote speaker at the meeting was the linguist B.
Elan Dresher (University of Toronto), who masterfully discussed methodological issues in working with the linguistic features of “old” texts.
Did the literati stop writing in SBH by the time they began writing in LBH?
Can we date books to a pre-Persian period because they are written in EBH?
(They repeatedly claim that their first volume was focused only on , but the very fact that they propose to replace the ancient-standard-late BH chronological model with a concurrent dialects model indicates very clearly that they make just as large claims about language as they do about texts).Which roles do regional dialects of Hebrew play in this debate?This book not only addresses these and related questions, but consistently and as comprehensively as possible deals with methodological matters and previous studies.Volume 1 introduces the field of linguistic dating of biblical texts with many texts samples presented for study.Volume 2 begins with a book by book survey of scholarship on the origins of biblical sources, passages and books, fooloowed by a detailed synthesis of the topics introduced in the first volume.