HALOT vs. Dictionary of Classical Hebrew
What are the major differences between the HALOT and the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each? For example, are there any specific reasons or uses for which one should have one over the other? Can anyone who has both give me their opinion on which they like better or use more and why?
Comments
-
Bump!
0 -
For this kind of question, it is best to search Google for academic reviews. These will highlight the contributions of a work and its weaknesses. For instance, here is one I found: https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/abr/43_50_clines.pdf
There may be others that offer a different or complementary assessment.
0 -
Francis said:
here is one I found: https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/abr/43_50_clines.pdf
Wow, that review was definitely not a fan of the DCH! But it usually takes time to determine how useful and trustworthy a resource is going to be.
0 -
Francis, you note an excellent article.
Andersen & Co is my favorite Logos author (I included & Co for when he pairs up). He/they come from a generation that explores outside normal bounds, but holds on to in internal discipline, while presenting work. I think that's what I like.
Hebrew is a dangerous language from an analytical perspective. NT greek is similar, though more analyzable using papyri. When a closed and small unknown religious group (multiple over time) own a language, all the 'normal' assumptions you can use are 'out'. Everything is not only manipulable, but likely manipulated. It's effectively a well intensioned variable religious language.
When I first started running neural nets on it, I stripped out anything irrelevant to a speaker, and anything easily manipulable (vocabulary, sentence structure, etc). Which worked, effectively matching most of the scholarly dating assignments and author matches. But that said, it was obvious, you're looking at swirling clouds.
I say the above relative to the OP's question. One dictionary is far better, but far better for a very iffy language.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Kiyah,
Sorry it has taken me so long to answer.
Of course, one difference is price.
I purchased the DCH after I had used HAL for many years.
Generally DCH has disappointed.
I attach the 2 articles on "rest" as in Ps23 for you to compare
Stephen
Australia
0 -
I treasure both but lean definitely toward DCH because: a) I find the attention to semantics very useful for this retired, octogenarian pastor (think attention to constructions, uses in different contexts; collocations with other words); b) the clarity of comments on textual questions raised by the BHS SESB apparatus.
0 -
Thanks for the feedback folks.
0
