Difference between revisions of "Dictionary:Changing Meanings/0"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 108: Line 108:
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li><b>דּוֹד&#160;</b>– Though today this can refer to an uncle on either the mother or father's side, see <multilink><a href="RashiYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink><fn>See also Sefer HaShorashim of both Ibn Janach and Radak.</fn> who notes that in Tanakh, the term is reserved for a father's brother.<fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra10-4" data-aht="source">Onkelos</a><a href="TargumOnkelosBereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:23</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra10-4" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:4</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra20-20" data-aht="source">Vayikra 20:20</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra25-49" data-aht="source">Vayikra 25:49</a><a href="TargumOnkelosBemidbar36-11" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 36:11</a><a href="Targum Onkelos" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Onkelos</a></multilink> who consistently translates "דוד" as אַחְבּוּהִי and דֹדֵיהֶן as אֲחֵי אֲבוּהוֹן.</fn>&#160; [It also takes the meaning of beloved, as in Shir HaShirim].&#160;</li>
+
<li><b>דּוֹד&#160;</b>– Though today "דּוֹד" can refer to an uncle on either the mother or father's side, see <multilink><a href="RashiYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink><fn>See also Sefer HaShorashim of both Ibn Janach and Radak.</fn> who notes that in Tanakh, the term is reserved for a father's brother.<fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra10-4" data-aht="source">Onkelos</a><a href="TargumOnkelosBereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:23</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra10-4" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:4</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra20-20" data-aht="source">Vayikra 20:20</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra25-49" data-aht="source">Vayikra 25:49</a><a href="TargumOnkelosBemidbar36-11" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 36:11</a><a href="Targum Onkelos" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Onkelos</a></multilink> who consistently translates "דוד" as אַחְבּוּהִי and דֹדֵיהֶן as אֲחֵי אֲבוּהוֹן.</fn>&#160; [It also takes the meaning of beloved, as in Shir HaShirim].&#160;</li>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
 
<li>See&#160;<a href="Yirmeyahu32-7-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a> where Rashi attempts to explain how Chanamel can be&#160; referred to as both Yirmeyahu's cousin and uncle,<fn>See Yirmeyahu 32:7,9 and 12.</fn> rejecting the possibility raised by some that he was Yirmeyahu's cousin on his father side and his uncle on his mother's side, claiming, "לא מצינו בכל המקרא אח האם קרוי דוד".&#8206;<fn>Cf.&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot1-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:15</a><a href="ShadalShemot2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5</a><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="ShadalDevarim32-43" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:43</a><a href="ShadalYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> brings an opinion that the word "דוד" in the verse should be understood as "ידיד". This understanding might relate to the usage of "דוד" to refer to a beloved.</fn>&#160;&#160;</li>
 
<li>See&#160;<a href="Yirmeyahu32-7-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a> where Rashi attempts to explain how Chanamel can be&#160; referred to as both Yirmeyahu's cousin and uncle,<fn>See Yirmeyahu 32:7,9 and 12.</fn> rejecting the possibility raised by some that he was Yirmeyahu's cousin on his father side and his uncle on his mother's side, claiming, "לא מצינו בכל המקרא אח האם קרוי דוד".&#8206;<fn>Cf.&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot1-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:15</a><a href="ShadalShemot2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5</a><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="ShadalDevarim32-43" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:43</a><a href="ShadalYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> brings an opinion that the word "דוד" in the verse should be understood as "ידיד". This understanding might relate to the usage of "דוד" to refer to a beloved.</fn>&#160;&#160;</li>
 
<li>See also <multilink><a href="RadakAmos6-10" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakAmos6-10" data-aht="source">Amos 6:10</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink><fn><multilink><a href="IbnEzraAmosFirstCommentary6-10" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar15-15" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 15:15</a><a href="IbnEzraKohelet3-11" data-aht="source">Kohelet 3:11</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary28-11" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 28:11</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary37-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 37:35</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotFirstCommentary2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot First Commentary 2:5</a><a href="IbnEzraAmosFirstCommentary6-10" data-aht="source">Amos First Commentary 6:10</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentaryIntroduction" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary Introduction</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary 1:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 1:1</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary66-7" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>&#160;brings this possibility in the name of R. Yehuda ibn Kuraish, but rejects it. See also Sefer HaShorashim of Ibn Janach.</fn> on <a href="Amos6-8-11" data-aht="source">Amos 6:10</a>, who raises the possibility that the hapax legomenon "מסרף" in the phrase "דּוֹדוֹ וּמְסָרְפוֹ" might refer to an uncle on the mother's side (suggesting that the words&#160; דוד and מסרף are a pair).<fn>Others suggest that the word is a variant of "משרף" and refers to one who comes to burn a corpse so it does not rot.</fn></li>
 
<li>See also <multilink><a href="RadakAmos6-10" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakAmos6-10" data-aht="source">Amos 6:10</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink><fn><multilink><a href="IbnEzraAmosFirstCommentary6-10" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar15-15" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 15:15</a><a href="IbnEzraKohelet3-11" data-aht="source">Kohelet 3:11</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary28-11" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 28:11</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary37-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 37:35</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotFirstCommentary2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot First Commentary 2:5</a><a href="IbnEzraAmosFirstCommentary6-10" data-aht="source">Amos First Commentary 6:10</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentaryIntroduction" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary Introduction</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary 1:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 1:1</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary66-7" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>&#160;brings this possibility in the name of R. Yehuda ibn Kuraish, but rejects it. See also Sefer HaShorashim of Ibn Janach.</fn> on <a href="Amos6-8-11" data-aht="source">Amos 6:10</a>, who raises the possibility that the hapax legomenon "מסרף" in the phrase "דּוֹדוֹ וּמְסָרְפוֹ" might refer to an uncle on the mother's side (suggesting that the words&#160; דוד and מסרף are a pair).<fn>Others suggest that the word is a variant of "משרף" and refers to one who comes to burn a corpse so it does not rot.</fn></li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
<li><b> "דָּת" </b>– The word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word,<fn>See discussion above.</fn> appearing predominantly in Sefer Esther, and consistently means "law" or "decree".<fn>See, for example, Esther 3:14-15, Esther 4:3 or Esther 8:17.</fn> This stands in contrast to the word's prevalent usage today where it means "religion".<fn>In the Rabbinic period, one might find attestations to both usages.&#160; See Tosefta Ketubot 4:9 which speaks of "דת משה וישראל", referring to the laws of the Torah or customs of Israel and Bavli Sukkah 56b, which speaks of Miryam, " שהמירה דתה", who apostated.&#160; It is possible, though, that In Bavli Sukkah, too, the phrase literally means that she "changed her laws."</fn><b><br/> </b></li>
+
<li><b> "דָּת" </b>– The word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word,<fn>See discussion above.</fn> which appears predominantly in Sefer Esther, and consistently means "law" or "decree".<fn>See, for example, Esther 3:14-15, Esther 4:3 or Esther 8:17.</fn> This stands in contrast to the word's prevalent usage today where it means "religion".<fn>In the Rabbinic period, one might find attestations to both usages.&#160; See Tosefta Ketubot 4:9 which speaks of "דת משה וישראל", referring to the laws of the Torah or customs of Israel and Bavli Sukkah 56b, which speaks of Miryam, " שהמירה דתה", who apostated.&#160; It is possible, though, that In Bavli Sukkah, too, the phrase literally means that she "changed her laws."</fn><b><br/> </b></li>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li>The difference in usage might lie at the cource of a debate regarding the meaning of Haman's words, "וְדָתֵיהֶם שֹׁנוֹת מִכׇּל עָם וְאֶת דָּתֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵינָם עֹשִׂים" in Esther 3:8. While Rashi and Rashbam asserts that Haman is complaining that the nation does not pay keep the king's laws, not paying taxes or participating in the army, Malbim presents Haman as pointing to the different religious beliefs of the nation.</li>
+
<li>The difference in usage might lie at the core of a debate regarding the meaning of Haman's words, "וְדָתֵיהֶם שֹׁנוֹת מִכׇּל עָם וְאֶת דָּתֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵינָם עֹשִׂים" in Esther 3:8. While Rashi and Rashbam asserts that Haman is complaining that the nation does not pay keep the king's laws, not paying taxes or participating in the army, Malbim presents Haman as pointing to the different religious beliefs of the nation.</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
<li><b>להתחתן </b>– In Tanakh, in contrast to modern Hebrew, the parties who are "מתחתן" are the חֹתֵן (father<fn>See the discussion above that this term might also refer to the brother of the bride, if he is the one contracting the marriage.</fn> of the bride) and the חָתָן (son-in-law)<fn>See <a href="Bereshit34-9" data-aht="source">Bereshit 34:9</a>, <a href="ShemuelI18-22-27" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 18:22-27</a>, <a href="MelakhimI3-1" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 3:1</a>.</fn> or the חֹתֵן (father of the bride) and the father of the groom,<fn>See <a href="Devarim7-1-4" data-aht="source">Devarim 7:3</a> and <a href="DivreiHaYamimII18-1" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 18:1</a>.</fn> not the husband and wife. The verb "להתחתן" is not used to describe the forming of the marital relationship between the bride and groom<fn>To describe the groom's taking of a wife, the verbs נשא or לקח are used instead.</fn> as it was the father of the bride and not the bride herself who was the active party in the marital contract. This betrays the nature of marriage in Tanakh as the formation of an alliance<fn>See, for instance, Shelomo's many marriages.</fn> rather than a bonding of love.</li>
 
<li><b>להתחתן </b>– In Tanakh, in contrast to modern Hebrew, the parties who are "מתחתן" are the חֹתֵן (father<fn>See the discussion above that this term might also refer to the brother of the bride, if he is the one contracting the marriage.</fn> of the bride) and the חָתָן (son-in-law)<fn>See <a href="Bereshit34-9" data-aht="source">Bereshit 34:9</a>, <a href="ShemuelI18-22-27" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 18:22-27</a>, <a href="MelakhimI3-1" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 3:1</a>.</fn> or the חֹתֵן (father of the bride) and the father of the groom,<fn>See <a href="Devarim7-1-4" data-aht="source">Devarim 7:3</a> and <a href="DivreiHaYamimII18-1" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 18:1</a>.</fn> not the husband and wife. The verb "להתחתן" is not used to describe the forming of the marital relationship between the bride and groom<fn>To describe the groom's taking of a wife, the verbs נשא or לקח are used instead.</fn> as it was the father of the bride and not the bride herself who was the active party in the marital contract. This betrays the nature of marriage in Tanakh as the formation of an alliance<fn>See, for instance, Shelomo's many marriages.</fn> rather than a bonding of love.</li>
Line 123: Line 123:
 
<li>Amalek - In speaking of Amalek's attack,&#160;<a href="Devarim25-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:18</a> states, "וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים".&#160; Commentators debate whether the description "יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" refers to Amalek or Israel, and, if the former, whether it describes the Amalekites' lack of ethics or disregard for God. See <a href="Annihilating Amalek" data-aht="page">Annihilating Amalek</a>.</li>
 
<li>Amalek - In speaking of Amalek's attack,&#160;<a href="Devarim25-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:18</a> states, "וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים".&#160; Commentators debate whether the description "יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" refers to Amalek or Israel, and, if the former, whether it describes the Amalekites' lack of ethics or disregard for God. See <a href="Annihilating Amalek" data-aht="page">Annihilating Amalek</a>.</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
<li>&#160;<b>מדבר</b> – In modern Hebrew a "מדבר" is defined as an area with a hot, dry climate and less than 250 mm of precipitation a year. <multilink><a href="RadakYehoshua8-15" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYehoshua8-15" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:15</a><a href="RadakYirmeyahu12-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 12:12</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink><fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamVayikra16-10" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamVayikra16-10" data-aht="source">Vayikra 16:10</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>. Cf. <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot3-1" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor </a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>who claims the opposite.&#160; On Shemot 3:2, he explains that Moshe went specifically "אחר המדבר" to shepherd, "שבמדבר לא היה מרעה".</fn> points out that in Tanakh, in contrast, the term refers to grazing land, unfit for agriculture but well suited for shepherding.&#160; He suggests that the word "מדבר" might relate to the root "דבר" meaning to lead (or shepherd).</li>
+
<li>&#160;<b>מדבר</b> – In modern Hebrew a "מדבר" is defined as an area with a hot, dry climate and less than 250 mm of precipitation a year. <multilink><a href="RadakYehoshua8-15" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYehoshua8-15" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:15</a><a href="RadakYirmeyahu12-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 12:12</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink><fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamVayikra16-10" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamVayikra16-10" data-aht="source">Vayikra 16:10</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>. Cf. <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot3-1" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor </a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>who claims the opposite.&#160; On Shemot 3:2, he explains that Moshe went specifically "אחר המדבר" to shepherd, "שבמדבר לא היה מרעה". See also Chazal who assert that he went to the Midbar specifically because it was desolate so as to distance himself from possible theft.</fn> points out that in Tanakh, in contrast, the term refers to grazing land, unfit for agriculture but well suited for shepherding.&#160; He suggests that the word "מדבר" might relate to the root "דבר" meaning to lead (or shepherd).</li>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
 
<li>The difference in meaning affects how one thinks about the forty years in the wilderness.&#160; Did the nation trek through barren, arid land, with intense heat and almost no water,<fn>This fits the descriptions of desolation in&#160;<a href="Devarim32-10" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:10</a> and <a href="Yirmeyahu2-6" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 2:6</a>.</fn> or were the conditions considerably better, with pasture for their livestock?<fn>See&#160;<a href="Bemidbar20-4-11" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 20:4-11</a> which suggests that the nation had livestock throughout the 40 years.</fn>&#160; See <a href="Realia:Life in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Life in the Wilderness</a>.</li>
 
<li>The difference in meaning affects how one thinks about the forty years in the wilderness.&#160; Did the nation trek through barren, arid land, with intense heat and almost no water,<fn>This fits the descriptions of desolation in&#160;<a href="Devarim32-10" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:10</a> and <a href="Yirmeyahu2-6" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 2:6</a>.</fn> or were the conditions considerably better, with pasture for their livestock?<fn>See&#160;<a href="Bemidbar20-4-11" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 20:4-11</a> which suggests that the nation had livestock throughout the 40 years.</fn>&#160; See <a href="Realia:Life in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Life in the Wilderness</a>.</li>

Version as of 04:20, 21 October 2020

Lexical: Changing Meanings

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Within the Biblical Period

There are several words whose meaning might have changed from one period within Tanakh to another:

  • אֲבָל – The meaning of this word has shifted over time, from meaning "indeed" or "verily" in the earlier book of Tanakh1 to meaning "but" in later books such as Daniel, Ezra and Divrei HaYamim.2
  • בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל – The connotation of this word has changed slightly over time. In most of Sefer Bereshit3 and the opening verses of Sefer Shemot4 the term  refers to the literal sons of Yaakov, whereas afterwards it refers to the nation of Israel.  The turning point might be Shemot 1:9, which uniquely states "עַם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל",‎5 perhaps to clarify that the people have become a nation.6  There are several cases in which the meaning of the term is ambiguous:
    • "לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה" (Bereshit 32:33) – See the debate in Bavli Chulin 100bChulin 100bAbout the Bavli whether this refers to something Yaakov's sons accepted upon themselves or whether this was a prohibition first commanded to the nation at at Sinai and placed in Sefer Bereshit to provide the reasoning behind the command.7
    • "וַיַּשְׁבַּע יוֹסֵף אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְהַעֲלִתֶם אֶת עַצְמֹתַי" (Bereshit 50:25) – It is ambiguous whether Yosef is speaking to his brothers or all their descendants.  The difference relates to a larger question: Did Yosef assume that after his death, the family would immediately return to Canaan or was Yosef aware the nation was to remain in Egypt for centuries and was requesting that the nation remember him when redeemed?8
  • דָּת – ShadalDevarim 33:2About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto points out that the word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word, first appearing as an independent word in the Book of Esther, where it means law or decree. The term appears only once earlier in Tanakh, in Devarim 33:2, where a phrase is read as if written "אֵשׁ דָּת", but is actually written as just one word "אשדת". This has led commentators to debate the term's meaning:
  • חֹדֶשׁ – It is possible that in Torah, "חֹדֶשׁ" refers to the full month,9 while in Prophets it also takes on the more specific meaning of "Rosh Chodesh", the first of the month.10 See, though, R. Moshe ibn ChiquitillaShemot Second Commentary 12:2About R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla who claims that the primary meaning of "חֹדֶשׁ" in Torah, too, is "Rosh Chodesh".11  The different possibilities affect one's reading of several verses:
  •  שַׁבַּת – It is possible that it is first in Prophets that the word "שַׁבַּת" refers to the seventh day of the week,15 while in Torah it refers to either a state of cessation,16 or the full week.17 When Torah speaks of the seventh day, it instead uses the terms "יּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי"‎18 or "יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת".‎19
    • The meaning of the word has important implications for the debate regarding the meaning of the phrase "מִמׇּחֳרַת הַשַּׁבָּת" in Vayikra 23:15, and the dating of both the bringing of the Omer offering and Shavuot. See MiMachorat HaShabbat for discussion.

Biblical vs. Rabbinic Hebrew

There are many words whose usage might have changed from the Biblical period to the Mishnaic period:

  • אמה – In Tanakh, the word אמה means either maidservant (when spelled without a dagesh) or a unit of measure (when spelled with a dagesh). In Rabbinic Hebrew, it may be used to refer also to the forearm itself.
  • בָּיִת – In Tanakh, this root generally refers to either a physical house23 or receptacle,24 or a family or household.25 In Rabbinic Hebrew it is also understood more narrowly to refer specifically to a wife.26
  • גּוֹי – Though the Sages use this word to refer to a non-Jew,27 in Tanakh it simply means nation, and can even refer to the Nation of Israel.28 In his Sefer HaShorashim, RadakSefer HaShorashimAbout R. David Kimchi attempts to explain the change in usage, suggesting that when the Sages wanted to identify a person as a non-Israelite but did not know his nationality, they would refer to him as simply "גוי", so as to say that he was from a different nation.
  • דָּמִֽים – In Tanakh this word is related to blood or life whereas in Mishnaic Hebrew it also takes the meaning of "money".29 
  • ה״א הקריאה – Contrast Ibn EzraBemidbar 15:15Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra on Bemidbar 15:15 who claims that there is no such thing as a "ה״א לקריאה" in Biblical Hebrew30 with Ibn BalaamBemidbar 15:15About R. Yehuda ibn Balaam who suggests that though rare, it does exist.   As examples, Ibn Balaam points to Bemidbar 15:15, Yirmeyahu 2:31Mikhah 2:7 and Shir HaShirim 8:13.
  • חותן/חותנת and חם/חמות – Biblical Hebrew distinguishes between a father-in-law on the husband and wife's side, using distinct terms for each.  The wife's father is referred to as a חותן,‎31 while the husband's father is referred to as a חם.‎32 Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, does not preserve the distinction and uses the terms חם and חמות to refer also to the parents of the wife.33  For further discussion, see חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת.
  • כל – In Biblical Hebrew the word "" can mean either all or "most".
  • מועד
  • מַלְאָךְ – In Biblical Hebrew "מַלְאָךְ" refers to any type of messenger,34 not specifically an angel. Divine messengers are singled out by the terms "מַלְאַךְ אֱלֹהִים" or "'מַלְאַךְ ה".‎35  In Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, "מַלְאָךְ" takes on the much more specific connotation of "angel".36 Tanakh's broader definition of the word allows for ambiguity and in several cases, commentators debate what type of messenger is referred to:
  • מַס – Hoil MosheShemot 1:11Bemidbar 31:28About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi points out that "מַס" in Tanakh refers to a labor tax rather than a monetary one,38 noting that the Biblical term for a monetary tribute is "מנחה" or "מכס".
    • This relates to a dispute among commentators regarding how to understand the role of the "tax officers" mentioned in Shemot 1:11. Though many assume this refers to those who oversaw the forced labor, RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 1:11About R. Levi b. Gershom suggests it refers to collection of a fiscal payment (as per the later usage of the word).  Ralbag opines that only those who could not afford the monetary fine were forced to labor for Paroh. See discussion in Who was Enslaved in Egypt.
  • מָקוֹם – Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 28:11Esther First Commentary IntroductionAbout R. Avraham ibn Ezra notes that in Tanakh, the word "מקום" never refers to Hashem and always connotes a location.  It is only the Sages who use the term to refer also to Hashem due to his omnipresence.39
  • עוֹלָם – Ibn EzraKohelet 3:11Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7About R. Avraham ibn Ezra notes that throughout Tanakh the word "עוֹלָם" is a marker of time, connoting a long duration or eternity. It is only in Rabbinic sources that the word takes on the extra meaning of "world".42 [In Tanakh, the word used to describe the world is "תֵּבֵל".]
  • עַם הָאָרֶץ – In Rabbinic Hebrew this term refers to an individual who does not have much Torah knowledge or is not careful in keeping the laws of purity or tithing.45  In Tanakh, in contrast, the term does not have a derogatory meaning and refers to a group rather than an individual, speaking of those living in the land. It is debated whether the term refers to the poorer masses or specifically to the higher classes, or if it is more general in nature.46
  • צְדָקָה - Though, in Rabbinic sources, the word צדקה refers to charity and giving of alms, R"Y KaraDevarim 24:13-14About R. Yosef Kara notes that it never takes this meaning in Tanakh, but rather refers to justice or righteousness. [It is, thus, often paired with the word "משפט".]47
  • צַדִּיק – In Rabbinic sources the word צדיק often refers to one who is extraordinarily righteous.  In Tanakh, though, it is possible that the word simply means innocent or just, but not exceptionally so.48 The difference might affect one's understanding of several verses:
  • רֹב – In contrast to Mishnaic and modern Hebrew where "רוב" means "most" or a "majority",49 in Tanakh the word consistently means abundance or many.50 
  • שְׁאוֹל – Tanakh never speaks of distinct after-worlds for the righteous and wicked, and instead uses one term, "שְׁאוֹל", to refer to the place to which all the dead go,51 being synonymous with either death itself, a grave, or perhaps the "underworld".52  By Mishnaic times, a distinction between an afterworld for the righteous (גן עדן) and wicked (גיהנום) already exists and the term "שְׁאוֹל" comes to refer to the latter.‎53
  • שכר – See Hoil Moshe Bemidbar 28:7About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazion Bemidbar 28:7 who suggests that the word "שכר" in Tanakh refers to a strong wine rather than an alcoholic beverage made of wheat (as per its usage later).54
  • תּוֹרָה  – In Rabbinic Hebrew the word "תּוֹרָה" refers to the Five Books of Chumash or a Torah scroll. In Tanakh, the term is more general, referring to a set of instructions, teaching or law.55 The difference in meaning might affect how commentators understand the several places in which there is a command to write or read " דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת":
    • Ceremony at Mt. Eval (Devarim 27:1-8) – Commentators dispute what was written on the stones, the entire Torah, only the laws, the Decalogue, or the blessings and curses mentioned in the unit. See
    • Writing / reading of the "Torah" (Devarim 31:9-11) – Here, too, one might dispute both what Moshe wrote and what the king is obligated to read during the hakhel ceremony: the entire Torah, Sefer Devarim or specific teachings therein.
  • תשובה – Though in Tanakh one can "return to Hashem"56 or "turn away from Hashem"57 the noun form "תשובה" is never used in this context. It, instead, refers to either a physical return from one place to another,58 a reply,59 or the turn of the year.60 In Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, the noun form is often used to refer to a spiritual return61 (repentance) and phrases like "לעשות תשובה", "בעל תשובה" or "לחזור בתשובה" appear.

Biblical vs. Modern Hebrew

  • הַבִּירָה – Though today, "בירה" is used to refer to a capital city, in Biblical Hebrew the word generally means simply palace or fortress,62 related to the Akkadian "birtu".
  • דּוֹד – Though today "דּוֹד" can refer to an uncle on either the mother or father's side, see RashiYirmeyahu 32:12About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki65 who notes that in Tanakh, the term is reserved for a father's brother.66  [It also takes the meaning of beloved, as in Shir HaShirim]. 
    • See Yirmeyahu 32:12 where Rashi attempts to explain how Chanamel can be  referred to as both Yirmeyahu's cousin and uncle,67 rejecting the possibility raised by some that he was Yirmeyahu's cousin on his father side and his uncle on his mother's side, claiming, "לא מצינו בכל המקרא אח האם קרוי דוד".‎68  
    • See also RadakAmos 6:10About R. David Kimchi69 on Amos 6:10, who raises the possibility that the hapax legomenon "מסרף" in the phrase "דּוֹדוֹ וּמְסָרְפוֹ" might refer to an uncle on the mother's side (suggesting that the words  דוד and מסרף are a pair).70
  • "דָּת" – The word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word,71 which appears predominantly in Sefer Esther, and consistently means "law" or "decree".72 This stands in contrast to the word's prevalent usage today where it means "religion".73
    • The difference in usage might lie at the core of a debate regarding the meaning of Haman's words, "וְדָתֵיהֶם שֹׁנוֹת מִכׇּל עָם וְאֶת דָּתֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵינָם עֹשִׂים" in Esther 3:8. While Rashi and Rashbam asserts that Haman is complaining that the nation does not pay keep the king's laws, not paying taxes or participating in the army, Malbim presents Haman as pointing to the different religious beliefs of the nation.
  • להתחתן – In Tanakh, in contrast to modern Hebrew, the parties who are "מתחתן" are the חֹתֵן (father74 of the bride) and the חָתָן (son-in-law)75 or the חֹתֵן (father of the bride) and the father of the groom,76 not the husband and wife. The verb "להתחתן" is not used to describe the forming of the marital relationship between the bride and groom77 as it was the father of the bride and not the bride herself who was the active party in the marital contract. This betrays the nature of marriage in Tanakh as the formation of an alliance78 rather than a bonding of love.
  • ירא א-להים – Today, this phrase is used to refer to a person who is a believing, God-fearing Jew, and focuses on the person's relationship to Hashem.  In Tanakh, though, it might also be used in the context of interpersonal relations, referring to someone's moral or ethical conduct.79 ShadalShemot 1:15About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto suggests that the term might refer to anyone who fears even a false god, for someone who fears such a higher authority will have some sense of morality.  The difference in meaning might affect how one reads several stories:
    • The Midwives – As the midwives are said to have "feared God" (Shemot 1:17), whether one understand the phrase to refer to having belief in Hashem or having a sense of morality will influence whether one suggests that they were Egyptian or Hebrew. See Who are the Midwives.
    • Amalek - In speaking of Amalek's attack, Devarim 25:18 states, "וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים".  Commentators debate whether the description "יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" refers to Amalek or Israel, and, if the former, whether it describes the Amalekites' lack of ethics or disregard for God. See Annihilating Amalek.
  •  מדבר – In modern Hebrew a "מדבר" is defined as an area with a hot, dry climate and less than 250 mm of precipitation a year. RadakYehoshua 8:15Yirmeyahu 12:12About R. David Kimchi80 points out that in Tanakh, in contrast, the term refers to grazing land, unfit for agriculture but well suited for shepherding.  He suggests that the word "מדבר" might relate to the root "דבר" meaning to lead (or shepherd).
    • The difference in meaning affects how one thinks about the forty years in the wilderness.  Did the nation trek through barren, arid land, with intense heat and almost no water,81 or were the conditions considerably better, with pasture for their livestock?82  See Life in the Wilderness.
  • נִין וָנֶכֶד‎‎83‎‎‎‎‎ – This pair of words appears three times in Tanakh,84 always in this order.  As such, in context, the terms would appear to mean child and grandchild respectively,85 or perhaps refer more generally to descendants (with no differentiation between the terms).86 In modern Hebrew, in contrast, נין and נכד no longer take on the general connotation of "descendant", and the chronological order is reversed and moved down a generation, with נכד referring to a grandson and נין referring to a great-grandson.87
  • נצל - The הפעיל form of this verb (הציל) has maintained the meaning of to save or deliver until today, but the meaning of the פיעל and התפעל forms might have changed over time:
    • The פיעל form appears in four places in Tanakh, but its meaning is ambiguous.  Based on the context, in three cases (Shemot 3:22, Shemot 12:35-36, and Divrei HaYamim II 20:25) the word appears to mean to strip or despoil,88 while in a fourth case it appears to mean to "save".  Both possibilities stand in contrast to the modern usage of "to exploit". See Reparations and Despoiling Egypt for how the different understandings might affect how one reads the command to borrow / ask for vessels from the Egyptians.
    • The התפעל form of "נצל" appears only once, in Shemot 33:6 where it appears to mean remove from one's self.89 Today, in contrast, the word means to apologize.  Yaakov Etzion90 notes that the connotation of the verb has changed over the years. In medieval times it was used in the context of defending one's self against others' arguments (rather than acknowledging guilt),91 and it meant to save one's self or cast off blame (thus, somewhat in keeping with the biblical usge of the term). Only in modern times does it refer to the taking responsibility for one's actions and expressing regret for them.
  • רגז – Today, this root relates to anger. See, though, RashbamBereshit 45:24Shemot 22:1Vayikra 16:10About R. Shemuel b. Meir who notes that in Tanakh it takes the meaning of "tremble" or "agitate",92 and is often paired with fear,93 not   anger.94
  • שופט – In modern Hebrew, a "שופט" serves solely in a judicial capacity.  In Biblical Hebrew, however, the verb "לשפט" might also refer to the execution of judgement, and the noun form has the broader connotation of "governor" or "savior" as well.
    • The difference in meaning might influence how one perceives the various "שופטים" of Sefer Shofetim. Were they religious leaders or simply warriors who took vengeance on Israel's enemies?  See Hoil Moshe on Shofetim 10:4