Q7 MT Deut 1:23 Mkm OV(l) – Possible difference in
766
Throughout this analysis suffixed pronominal forms written with final heh, such as 2ms hk-, 2mpl hmk-,
and 3mpl hm(h)-, as well as the independent pronominal forms written with final heh, such as 1cs h)wh,
3mpl hmh and 3fpl hnh, are treated as reflecting a potential difference in pronunciation when contrasted
with the common Massoretic forms of these pronominal suffixes and independent pronouns without final
heh. This observation extends also to particular verbal forms that show the same terminal heh, namely the 2
ms perfect htl+q and the 1c imperfect hl+q)/n. Discussion around the long forms of the suffixed and in-
dependent pronouns has focussed mainly on the issue of interpreting the final heh on these pronouns as
signifying an orthographic or a morphological difference, that is, whether or not the variation in the spell-
ing reflects an orthographic convention or an actual difference in pronunciation. An exhaustive list of the
scholarly literature that makes up this discussion is difficult to collate, but see primarily M. Martin, The
Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls (2 vols.; Louvian: Publications Universitaires, 1958) 8, E.Y.
Kutscher, The Language and Linguistic Background of the Isaiah Scroll (STDJ VI; Leiden: Brill, 1974) 45-
48, 57-58, 434-38, 448-49, E. Qimron, Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 57-64, E. Tov, "The Orthography
and Language of the Hebrew Scrolls found at Qumran and the Origin of these Scrolls," Textus 13 (1986), S.
Morag, "Qumran Hebrew: Some Typological Observations," VT 38, 2 (1988) 158-59, F.M. Cross, "Some
Notes on a Generation of Qumran Studies," The Madrid Qumran Congress: Proceedings of the Interna-
tional Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Madrid, 18-21 March, 1991 (eds L. Trebolle Barrera and L. Ve-
gas Montaner; STDJ 11 Leiden: Brill, 1992), E. Tov, "Some Notes on a Generation of Qumran Studies: A
Reply," The Madrid Qumran Congress: Proceedings of the International Congress on the Dead Sea
Scrolls, Madrid, 18-21 March, 1991 (eds L. Trebolle Barrera and L. Vegas Montaner; STDJ 11 Leiden:
Brill, 1992), M.G. Abegg, "The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls," The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years:
A Comprehensive Assessment (eds P.W. Flint and J.C. Vanderkam; Brill, 1998) 327-39, K. Dong-Hyuk,
"Free Orthography in a Strict Society: Reconsidering Tov's "Qumran orthography"," DSD 11, 3 (2004), and
E. Tov, "Reply to Dong-Hyuk Kim's Paper on 'Tov's Qumran Orthography'," DSD 11, 3 (2004). The view
taken in this analysis is that in light of Rule 1 the spellings with final heh do represent an underlying differ-
ence in pronunciation. The similarities to Samaritan pronunciation go some way towards supporting this
view (see E.Y. Kutscher, Language and Linguistic Background, 449), and one may see some influence of
Samaritan or perhaps even Aramaic in the unusual forms that appear in Qumran Hebrew, as does W.
Weinberg, The History of Hebrew Plene Spelling (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1985) 9. How-
ever this evidence should not be overstated, as it must be said that the similarities in Samaritan pronuncia-
tion do not extend to all of the peculiar orthographic nuances of Qumran Hebrew (see E. Tov, "Orthogra-
phy and Language," 39, E.Y. Kutscher, Language and Linguistic Background, 567, and E. Qimron, He-
brew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 40-42). Rather, we can surmise with D. Talshir, "The Habitat and History of
Hebrew During the Second Temple Period," Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology (ed. I.
Young; London: T&T Clark International, 2003) 264-66, that the Qumran Hebrew forms with extraneous
terminal heh are a logical continuation of what is termed Late Biblical Hebrew, while the orthography of
the Massoretic Text, without taking into account the vowel pointing of the Massoretes themselves, is in line
with the spelling in Mishnaic Hebrew, for which see M.H. Segal, A Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew (Ox-
ford: Clarendon Press, 1927; repr., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980) 41. We therefore adopt the
view that the spelling of Qumran Hebrew forms with terminal heh reflect a pronunciation which stems