Dictionary Classical Hebrew

[rpat1]

Hi,

 

Could someone please share some screenshots of the 8 vol Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. The concise version I find is excellent and I wonder if buying the full version is worthwhile. I did search the forums for some screenshots and I did see one or two but some more would be a great help.

 

Many thanks

 

Robert.

[A.D. Riddle]

Here are two, one noun and one verb. Is there something specific you would like to see?

 

A.D.

 

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bxrv30-teYLKNDJOTThYdVY0NG8/edit

 

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bxrv30-teYLKZEdCTG14ZDAxbTQ/edit

[rpat1]

Brilliant A.D. that is what I was looking for! I think I am going to purchase this dictionary.

 

Many tthanks for your help.

 

Robert.

[rpat1]

Just one more question would I need to buy the english translation of the non biblical dead sea scrolls, does this translation work with the DCH ?

 

Many thanks again.

 

Robert.

[Rick Bennett]

Just one more question would I need to buy the english translation of the non biblical dead sea scrolls, does this translation work with the DCH ?

 

Many thanks again.

 

Robert.

 

Given the scholarly emphasis of this resource, all links to DSS, Ben Sira and Inscriptions are to the Hebrew versions. If you do not have these versions installed clicking the link will give an error. We are actually working on a feature that will allow us to program an array of valid choices if the first resource isn't found, but it isn't ready for release yet. Until then you would either need the Hebrew version to take advantage of the hyperlinking or navigate to the resource yourself.

 

Hope this helps…

[rpat1]

Rick,

 

I appreciate your response thank you very much!

 

Robert.

[Abram K-J]

Given the scholarly emphasis of this resource, all links to DSS, Ben Sira and Inscriptions are to the Hebrew versions. If you do not have these versions installed clicking the link will give an error. We are actually working on a feature that will allow us to program an array of valid choices if the first resource isn't found, but it isn't ready for release yet. Until then you would either need the Hebrew version to take advantage of the hyperlinking or navigate to the resource yourself.

 

Rick, I know this is an old thread, but I'm curious about your part of the quote above (which I've bolded)--if this is still in the pipeline?

[Gedalya]

Which dictionary is a better choice? Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew or HALOT? What are the pluses and negatives of each dictionary?

Thanks.

[Abram K-J]

It depends on how much Hebrew you're doing. If it's confined to the Hebrew Bible, HALOT would suffice. If you're interested in Ben Sira and the inscriptions and the DSS, CDCH covers that, too.

 

However, even if you're not interested in a larger corpus than the Hebrew Bible, CDCH is still useful in showing other word uses beyond the Bible per se--and all of the examples are translated into English, too. So there's benefit to using it even if you don't ever read any Hebrew inscriptions.

 

DCH and CDCH also have word frequency counts, which I don't believe HALOT has. (Others will correct me if I'm wrong.)

 

I'm sure others can weigh in on the content of each dictionary more specifically. The real comparison, though, would be between the full DCH (not concise) and HALOT.

 

UPDATE: comparable (in terms of depth) to the Concise DCH is Holladay's Concise HALOT, which is not available in Accordance.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Abram K-J

[Gedalya]

Thanks for your reply. The reason I ask is because I saw a few sample pages and felt that in at least one case there was quite a bit more conjecture and speculation in the CDCH than in other dictionaries. For eg, There is the suggestion in this dictionary that in Isaiah 58:12, the word N”TIVOT means “ruins”. There seems to be no basis for explaining the word N"tivot as "ruins" since N'tivot means "paths". The author doesn't mention that he wishes to emend the text and i have it one good authority that there is no version or qumran text that could support such an emendation. So on what basis (except an attempt to make it parallel to the beginning of the verse) could he translate as he does? Moreover, he gives a false impression that root of the word n'tivot could actually mean "ruins"!

[Nick Laurence]

I have both HALOT and DCH, which is nice if you can afford them. DCH, as others have said, has a wider selection of Hebrew lemmas; but it does "what it says on the tin" - if you want Aramaic, forget it! HALOT has entries for the Aramaic words found in Daniel and Ezra (plus the Aramaic verse in Genesis), but that's it - if you want to read the Targumim you'll need something else.

 

DCH is a little more up-to-date than HALOT. DCH generally doesn't give etymological information, which would be useful if you read more than one semitic language. Its word count feature is really helpful (it's reassuring, when I've resorted took looking up a word, to find that it's a low-incidence word!).

 

In response to gorab1's specific question above, the full DCH does list "path" as a meaning for נְתִיבָה and cites Isa 58:12. It goes on to give a suggestion of "ruins", and I find its habit of providing alternative suggestions quite helpful. It gives a footnote to this which explains (in a rare instance of citing etymology):

 

נְתִיבָה II ruin, what has been cut down (cf. Akk. natābu cut off)G.R. Driver, Notes on Isaiah, in Von Ugarit nach Qumran: Beiträge zur alttestamentlichen und altorientalischen Forschung, Otto Eissfeldt zum 1. September 1957 dargebracht von Freunden und Schülern (ed. J. Hempel and L. Rost; BZAW, 77; Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1961), 4248 (48).

Edited February 19, 2014 by nicklaurence

[Gedalya]

Nicklaurence,

Thank you very much for you reply. Unfortunately, the Concise version does not explain nor even hint that the derivation is not mere speculation but is based on this Akkadian word natabu. I guess one needs the full DCH.

[Gedalya]

In addition I would add this: In their introduction to the dictionary, they write: "...data about the meaning of cognate words in Akkadian and Arabic, for example, are strictly irrelevant to the Hebrew language" !! WOW! That is quite a statement!

And they also claim that the presence of cognate material in other dictionaries "is highly problematic, and it is difficult to see what purpose it serves"

(I took these quotes from an AJSR review of volume 1 of the dictionary which I found by googling the dictionary)

And,yet, in this example from Isaiah 58:12, they quote an akkadian source brought by Driver !

[Gedalya]

As a further follow up to the note you quoted on Isaiah 58:12 that appears in DCH, I would add that Professor Shalom Paul of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem who wrote the definitive commentary on Isaiah 40-66 just wrote me that there is "NO SUCH WORD in Akkadian NON-EXISTENT!!"

[Nick Laurence]

In their introduction to the dictionary, they write: "...data about the meaning of cognate words in Akkadian and Arabic, for example, are strictly irrelevant to the Hebrew language" !! WOW! That is quite a statement!

And they also claim that the presence of cognate material in other dictionaries "is highly problematic, and it is difficult to see what purpose it serves"

(I took these quotes from an AJSR review of volume 1 of the dictionary which I found by googling the dictionary)

And,yet, in this example from Isaiah 58:12, they quote an akkadian source brought by Driver !

 

I suspect they are trying to strike a balance in the field of semitic cognates based on the work of the late James Barr, who has left us all with warning bells ringing in our ears about going too far along these lines.

 

Professor Shalom Paul of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem who wrote the definitive commentary on Isaiah 40-66 just wrote me that there is "NO SUCH WORD in Akkadian NON-EXISTENT!!"

 

This goes beyond my competence. It could well be that Driver was wrong - it was a long time ago. I still think the overall approach of DCH is to try to be helpful in offering suggestions that others have made. I don't know David Clines personally, but I hear he's a nice guy. Why don't you try emailing him on this subject (you can find his email easily on the Sheffield University website) and see if he replies. If he does, let us know.

[Randy Steffens Jr]

I have the CDCH, and I'd like to know if it's worth the upgrade to the DCH. I have HALOT. Any advice?

 

Thanks,

Randy

[Abram K-J]

The thread above has some good input. The question I would ask is (to help decide): how often are you digging deeply into individual Hebrew words? And for what purpose?

[Randy Steffens Jr]

Fairly often, although I don't know much Hebrew at present. The CDCH is nice but it often seems so basic that I find HALOT more useful at this point. But with the sale on DCH I'm wondering if I should snatch it while I'm able. I will likely be attending seminary soon, which may make that upgrade even more valuable.

[Abram K-J]

Yes--I've benefited from HALOT quite a bit, especially for exegesis papers. I haven't used DCH a whole lot... it has gone on sale a couple times in the last year, so if it did again in the future (which seems likely, though that's just speculation), you could always hold off for now and get a little further in your Hebrew studies, see what your professor/school thinks and uses, etc.

 

From what I've examined, CDCH is a nice condensation, and with HALOT also in hand, has served me just fine. I think with regard to learning languages and purchasing lexicons (whether print or electronic), a bird in the bush is just as good as a bird in hand.

[Randy Steffens Jr]

Thanks a lot! That's very helpful.

 

Randy

[Abram K-J]

Sure thing!