5. Rabbinic entries in R. Judah Ibn-Tibbon’s translation of Duties of the Hearts1
p. 119-153
Texte intégral
1. Introduction
1Rabbi Bahye Ibn-Paquda wrote his Al-Hidāya ilā Farāʾiḍ al-Qulūb (‘Guide to the Duties of the Heart’) in Judaeo-Arabic at the end of the eleventh century.2 For centuries, it was the most widely known work of Jewish ethics in the Jewish world.3 This was due mainly to the early Hebrew translation of the book only seventy years after it had been written.4 Originally, there were two separate translations of the book. One was Judah Ibn-Tibbon’s translation, under the title Sefer Ḥovot ha-Levavot, which was more widely known and consequently is available today in many manuscripts and printed editions. The other was by Joseph Qimḥi. His translation was not as popular as Ibn-Tibbon’s, and perhaps that is why we have only a small remnant of it today.5
2Judah Ibn-Tibbon was born in Granada, probably in 1120.6 He was a physician, a translator, a merchant, and a book collector.7 Around 1150 he moved to southern France and became a prominent figure in the Jewish community of Lunel. Ibn-Tibbon was a fountain of knowledge; people consulted with him and he would lend books from his private library. Bahye Ibn-Paquda’s Ḥovot ha-Levavot was the first book Ibn-Tibbon translated. After that he translated Solomon Ibn-Gabirol’s Tikkun Middot ha-Nefesh (‘Improvement of Moral Qualities’) and Mivḥar Peninim (‘Choice of Pearls’), Yonah Ibn-Janaḥ’s Sefer ha-Shorashim (‘Book of Roots’) and Sefer ha-Riqmah (‘Book of the Multicoloured Flower Beds’), Judah Halevi’s Ha-Kuzari (‘The Kuzari’), and Saadia Gaon’s Sefer Emunot ve-Deot (‘Book of Beliefs and Opinions’).8
3Like many medieval authors and translators,9 Ibn-Tibbon complained that Hebrew was inadequate in comparison with other languages (especially Arabic); some called this deficiency‘language insufficiency’.10 It was clear to these authors and translators that the Hebrew of previous ages had been sufficient for all the needs of the people at the time. Since the ancient texts (the Bible, rabbinic literature, and early liturgy) dealt with limited subjects, the Hebrew reflected in them was limited as well. As they knew Hebrew mostly from these sources, it was insufficient for composing original works and for translating works from different languages that dealt with different and wider issues that did not appear in earlier Hebrew writings.
4None of the previous periods of Hebrew was sufficient on its own to be used as a source for structures and lexicon to create a whole translation. Therefore, Ibn-Tibbon decided to combine Biblical Hebrew, Rabbinic Hebrew, liturgy, and previous medieval Hebrew works — both syntactically and lexically.11 On different occasions, he derived new lexemes from roots and other lexical stems taken from classical literature, and occasionally he shifted the meanings of biblical and rabbinic lexemes. In the prefaces to two of his translations, Ibn-Tibbon reveals to the reader the changes he had to make in the lexicon, and he is apologetic for these actions.
5Considering the arguments and efforts of these authors and translators, one might expect that the lion’s share of the lexicon in their writings would consist of neologisms of different kinds (both morphological and semantic neologisms). The analysis of the nominal lexicon used by Ibn-Tibbon in his translation of Duties of the Hearts serves as a useful source of confirmation or refutation. I believe that the analysis presented below indeed refutes this assumption, or at least suggests a different perspective on this impression.
2. The nominal lexicon in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation of Duties of the Hearts
6In Ibn-Tibbon’s translation of Duties of the Hearts, I have found 2,102 nominal entries (1,878 lexemes and 224 phrases).12 As is shown in Table 1, almost 50 percent of the entries are taken from the Bible, approximately 26 percent from rabbinic literature, a small portion from the liturgy, and around 8 percent from medieval writings composed prior to the era during which Ibn-Tibbon engaged in his translation work. Just under 15 percent are neologisms coined by Ibn-Tibbon.
Table 1: Breakdown of Ibn-Tibbon’s vocabulary
Period / Neological type | Entries | Percentage |
Bible | 1,035 | 49.23 percent |
Apocrypha | 7 | 0.33 percent |
Rabbinic literature | 558 | 26.57 percent |
Liturgy | 21 | 1.00 percent |
Medieval writings | 171 | 8.14 percent |
Period / Neological type | Entries | Percentage |
Semantic neologisms13 | 118 | 5.57 percent |
Morphologic neologisms14 | 79 | 3.76 percent |
New phrases15 | 113 | 5.38 percent |
Total | 2,102 | 100 percent |
7Although not all entries were taken ‘as is’ from classical Hebrew writings, these findings shed a different light on the perception of medieval Hebrew as presented by authors and translators of that era. In other words, if Hebrew could not provide sufficient words and phrases to express deep ideas and nuances, neologisms should have constituted the main portion of the lexicon and classical Hebrew entries should have been in the minority. The fact that most of the vocabulary in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation was taken from classical Hebrew suggests that reservations and complaints regarding the state of Medieval Hebrew might be due less to the actual state of Hebrew and more to a perceived need to defend against claims of medieval authors and philosophers (e.g., Abraham Ibn-Ezra) critical of the way other authors tried to make changes in the Hebrew language.
8The following is a description of representative entries used by Ibn-Tibbon to translate Duties of the Hearts.16 The aim of this description is to present and examine the nature of the Rabbinic Hebrew lexicon in the nominal lexicon of Ibn-Tibbon. It will hopefully shed light on the rich semantic and morphological variety of Medieval Hebrew, both from the perspective of Rabbinic Hebrew and from the perspective of Hebrew morphological and semantic mechanisms.
9In each example the Hebrew entry, as it appears in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation, will be followed by the Arabic equivalents in Ibn-Paquda’s original. For each equivalent I will cite one example, which will include the Arabic original,17 the Hebrew translation of Ibn-Tibbon, and the English translation of Hyamson.18 In a footnote I will present the treatise and the chapter the example is cited from. Overall, Duties of the Hearts consists of an introduction and ten treatises: (a) The unity of God; (b) Examination of creation; (c) The service of God; (d) Trust in God; (e) Wholehearted devotion; (f) Humility; (g) Repentance; (h) Spiritual accounting; (i) Abstinence; (j) The love of God.
3. Rabbinic entries in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation of Duties of the Hearts
10The rabbinic nominal entries can be divided into six categories:
Biblical lexemes with rabbinic meanings
Rabbinic lexemes with rabbinic meanings
Rabbinic lexemes with both rabbinic and new meanings
Rabbinic lexemes with new meanings
Root and stem combination: rabbinic roots
Linear word-formation: rabbinic stems
3.1 Biblical lexemes with rabbinic meanings
11In total, 33 lexemes from this category were found in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation. Although not all the examples presented here reflect new or unknown meanings, they certainly comprise the largest part of Rabbinic Hebrew in Ibn-Tibbon’s nominal lexicon.
12(1)
13The biblical meaning of this lexeme is ‘pinion (i.e., wing)’, while its rabbinic meaning is ‘limb, organ’.19 These original and later meanings reflect a simple metonymy, in which the original meaning represents a specific example and the later meaning a more simplified and general meaning that is based on the biblical meaning. This lexeme is used by Ibn-Tibbon to translate four different Arabic equivalents:
14(a): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘because he seeks them by means of organs other than those with which they can be apprehended’.20
15(b): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘to the amputation of one of his limbs and to its loss’.21
16(c): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘in the perfection of its form and its specific (human) kind, in the shaping of his limbs’.22
17(d): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘but when he was alone, he would ejaculate: O for inward light’.23
18As is clearly evident in these citations, equivalents (a) to (c) correspond to the rabbinic meanings. Apparently, equivalent (d) is the result of a mistake in the translation, probably made by Ibn-Tibbon himself, who mistakenly translated with this lexeme the wordwhich in Hebrew means
‘friends’.24
19(2)
20While the biblical meaning of this entry is ‘profaneness, pollution’, the rabbinic meaning is ‘fawning and praising in order to please someone’.25 As in the previous example, the rabbinic meaning, which is employed in the Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, reflects a metonymy in comparison with the original biblical meaning: the rabbinic meaning represents the method of realising the concept that appears in the biblical meaning. In Ibn-Tibbon’s translation, there is one equivalent for this Hebrew entry:
21: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘it may, however, be hypocritical; the aim may be to obtain praise for it and honour among one’s fellow-men’.26
22(3)
23The biblical meaning of this word is ‘bag, purse’,27 and its rabbinic meaning is ‘skin pocket in which glands are placed’.28 This entry has two Arabic equivalents in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation:
24(a): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘what belongs to the green gall goes to the gall-bladder’.29
25(b): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the liver for purifying the food; the tubes for removing superfluities; the bowels for retention’.30
26The semantic shift from the original biblical meaning to the rabbinic meaning is expressed by a metaphor based on the resemblance of shape and designation between the two.
27(4)
28Biblical meaning: ‘returning, coming back’; rabbinic meaning: ‘penitent’.31 Mishnaic Hebrew reflects a meaning that is more metaphorical in comparison with the biblical meaning. This metaphorical shift represents the movement of meaning from the physical field to the spiritual-cognitive field. In Ibn-Tibbon’s translation, this entry has one Arabic equivalent:
29: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the reason being that every penitent, previously to sinning, has been righteous, while every righteous man has not necessarily been a penitent’.32
3.2 Rabbinic lexemes with rabbinic meanings
30In total, there are approximately 450 entries in this category. I will present here two examples, each of which comprises two lexemes, and both of which reflect characteristic phenomena of Rabbinic Hebrew. The first example represents the double form of the verbal noun pattern of the Hifil stem:33
31(5)
32This form of the verbal noun has three equivalents in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation:
33(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘prohibitions in the category of duties of the heart are, for example, associating in the worship of God any other being with Him… secretly’.34
34(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘of these, 365 are prohibitions’.35
35(c): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘the more will you respect his commandments and prohibitions’.36
36(6)
37As opposed to, this form of verbal noun has only two Arabic equivalents in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation, only one of which is shared with the previous verbal noun:
38(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘in the Scriptures, exhortations to limit speech occur so frequently and are so familiar that they are not unknown to anyone’.37
39(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘but if you are living in solitude, you are undoubtedly exonerated from the duty of exhorting them to do good and warning them to abstain from evil’.38
40In the dictionaries of Even-Shoshan and Ben-Yehuda the lexemeis claimed to be a neologism of Medieval Hebrew. As revealed by the Historical Dictionary Project of the Academy of the Hebrew Language, it is found already in the Babylonian Talmud, Shebuoth 47b (MS Vatican 140). This lexeme also appears in the liturgy of Yannai and Ha-Kalir, in different manuscripts and in Genizah segments.39 However, it is doubtful whether Ibn-Tibbon was familiar with these specific writings and witnesses, and it is possible, even probable, that he created this neologism on his own.
41The following examples (7 and 8) reflect another phenomenon that is characteristic of Rabbinic Hebrew; the assimilation of III-alef roots to III-yod roots. In Ibn-Tibbon’s translation of Duties of the Hearts, both forms are found:
42(7)
43(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘but he who trusts in the Lord will gain the esteem of his fellow-men, when his trust will become generally known’.40
44(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘of God’s good plan, of His government and the fulfilment of His decrees for His creatures’.41
45Equivalent (c) has a plural meaning, and is translated only by the Hebrew plural form:
46(c): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘that God only wished to point out to His creatures a way by which they would improve their condition in this world’.42
47(8)
48(a): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the demonstration through the senses was an addition to the intellectual stimulus which human beings naturally possess’.43
49(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘concerning God’s work and its various products which He created for their improvement’.44
50(c): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the second is observation of the world wherein one sees some of the wonders of God exhibited in His creatures’.45
51As in example (7), equivalent (d) has a plural meaning, and is translated only by the Hebrew plural form:
52(d): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘ [a person should] investigate everything in the universe from the smallest creatures to the largest’.46
53Regarding the Arabic equivalents of these two lexemes, it is interesting to note that as opposed to the case in Rabbinic Hebrew, in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation they do not function as free variants.
3.3 Rabbinic lexemes with both rabbinic and new meanings
54All the entries presented in my glossary are marked etymologically according to the earliest relevant meaning used by Ibn-Tibbon in his translation, and not necessarily according to the first time the lexeme (or phrase) is documented in Hebrew literature. Therefore, I focus here only on the rabbinic entries whose usage and meaning Ibn-Tibbon widened.
55(9)
56(a): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘the limbs of the human body, or the parts of other things that are put together… for their efficiency and completeness’.47
57(b): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘so intimately mixed and fused, that each of them sustains the other, like body and soul in living creatures’.48
58(c): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘As the Creator, blessed be He, bound the soul to this gross, physical body, through which he was pleased to test it’.49
59(d): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘after physical lust has been overcome and the intellect has obtained the victory over it’.50
60(e): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the stars in their array like lamps, all objects accumulated in it like treasures’.51
61Equivalents (a) to (c) reflect the rabbinic meanings of the lexeme. It appears that equivalent (d) was formed only due to a contextual translation (translation of an Arabic noun and an Arabic adjective into a Hebrew construct). Nevertheless, the general rabbinic meaning is appropriate here, too. Equivalent (e), which is a semantic neologism of Ibn-Tibbon’s, was created by using a metaphor that is based on the resemblance to the original meaning of the lexeme. It is interesting to see in this quotation the attraction of the Hebrew feminine suffix of the adjective
in comparison with the form of the Hebrew lexeme
62(10)
63(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘wherein he is given freedom to use his limbs and accorded liberty to direct his thoughts to good or evil inclinations’.52
64(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘every one of the things that we have just mentioned is called One conventionally.53
65In the Talmud (i.e., in Rabbinic Hebrew), the lexemehas two meanings:54 (1) moving, transferring someone or something to another place, and (2) removal, distancing. Metaphorically, in equivalent (b), Ibn-Tibbon is using this lexeme with the meaning of ‘metaphor’ or a shift — namely, a semantic change from one semantic field to another.
66(11)
67In Biblical Hebrew, the lexemeoccurs only in the plural, both in the construct state or with a possessive pronoun. In the absolute state, this lexeme occurs only in the Babylonian Talmud. Ibn-Tibbon used this word frequently, with its rabbinic meanings: see equivalents (a), (b), (d), (e), and (f), and with two new meanings, as in equivalents (c) ‘nature’ and (g) ‘result’:
68(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘then he will make use of the third part — the historical portions of the Scriptures, in order that he may know the various types of men and their histories’.54
69(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘one of them is inherent in the mind, implanted in the human faculty of cognition, innate from the beginning of his existence’.55
70(c): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the synthesis, however, wrought by Nature, is complete and endures for an indefinite period’.56
71(d): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘wisdom is innate in a man’s being, in his nature and faculties of perception, like water that is hidden in the bowels of the earth’.57
72(e): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘they spend their days in the study of singular deductions from the legal principles and of what is strange and difficult in the final decisions’.58
73(f): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘troubling their hearts, each one worried by the result of his arrogance and brooding on his vicissitudes’.59
74(g): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the benefit of spiritual accounting here discussed, consists in the results’.60
3.4 Rabbinic lexemes with new meanings
75As is common in many developing languages, semantic shifts are an elementary method for enriching an existing vocabulary and for bringing back into use lexemes that were once part of the lexicon. Like many others before him, Ibn-Tibbon used metaphors and metonymies for this purpose. On rare occasions, he used ellipsis, folk etymology, and loan shifts. All these rare cases involve biblical lexemes or other medieval neologisms, and therefore I will not present them here.61 Here are some examples of the metonymies and metaphors Ibn-Tibbon used in the case of rabbinic lexemes.
76(12)
77Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘in regard to forgiveness of evil speech and depreciation’.62
78The lexemeappears in the Palestinian Talmud with the meaning of ‘shame, disgrace, defamation’.63 Ibn-Tibbon used here the meaning of the process instead of its result, and the metonymy ‘to shame, to defame’ was created.
79(13)
80: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the noblest of the gifts which God bestowed on His human creatures, next to having created them with mature faculties of perception and comprehension’.64
81The rootoccurs in Piel in Biblical Hebrew.65 The participle
occurs as a noun in Rabbinic Hebrew. However, only in the translation of Ibn-Tibbon does this lexeme start to convey the meaning of a ‘human being’, as opposed to animals, which cannot talk. The metonymy here represents the main characteristic of the object, just as in the case of the biblical lexeme
‘crawl’ (cf.
‘snakes’), and in the case of
‘inanimate’, another neologism of Ibn-Tibbon.
82(14)
83: Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘even food would not be perfectly digested by any living creature’.66
84In the Mishnah, the verbal nounmeans ‘preparing food for eating by heating with fire’, and, in the Talmud, the meaning was expanded to ‘ripening, becoming good for eating’.67 In Ibn-Tibbon’s translation, another metaphor is used, and hence the meaning ‘digestion’ was added in order to reflect the meaning of the Arabic equivalent
It is important to note that this lexeme with such a meaning was rare in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation and that this meaning is omitted in various modern Hebrew diachronic dictionaries.68
85(15)
86(a): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘and its parts unite. The basic principle of Synthesis in Unity’.69
87(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘so, too, if a man accepts the doctrine of the Unity on the grounds of tradition only, he can never be sure that he will not come to associate the worship of the One God with the worship of another being’.70
88(c): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the repentance should refer to the particular sinful act, and also to the class to which the act belongs; the heart should cooperate in its devotion to God’.71
89The rabbinic meaning that Ibn-Tibbon relied on in order to achieve the metaphor that is reflected in the equivalents (a) to (c) is ‘to participate, joining someone to work together on something’.72 This meaning is used in Rabbinic Hebrew in the Palestinian Talmud. The metaphor created by Ibn-Tibbon is the result of the resemblance between ‘shared work’ and ‘polytheism’, as some idols were alleged to work together to fulfil all of the people’s needs.
3.5 Root and stem combination: Rabbinic roots
90The root and stem combination as applied to rabbinic roots is reflected in several verbal nouns of three different verbal stems. Here I will present briefly the verbal nouns that were created by Ibn-Tibbon from rabbinic roots, divided according to their verbal stems. It is obvious that Ibn-Tibbon created these lexemes under direct influence of Arabic, either due to root resemblance (as in example 16) or due to the use of the Hebrew root as an equivalent of one or more Arabic roots.
91Hifil: six separate verbal nouns of this stem were innovated by Ibn-Tibbon in his translation, using both the haqṭala and the heqṭel patterns (examples 16–21). Some of these lexemes are common in the translation and some are relatively rare.
92(16)
93: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘beware of excess and exaggeration, of aught that does not proceed gradually lest you perish’.73
94(17)
95(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘general abstinence is that which is practiced to improve our physical condition and keep our secular affairs in order’.74
96(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the value of these faculties in the care of our bodies and ordering of our activities is known to all’.75
97(18)
98: Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘so, too, in accordance with the Creator’s protection of him and providing for him in all his affairs’.76
99(19)
100: Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘beware of excess and exaggeration, of aught that does not proceed gradually lest you perish’.77
101(20)
102Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘to these should be added complaisance in sinning; this means continuance in transgression’.78
103(21)
104: Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the brain is the seat of the spiritual faculties, the well-spring of sensation and the root from which the nerves begin’.79
105The rootsand
are documented in Rabbinic Hebrew in the Hifil stem, but not as verbal nouns. Like these roots,
also occurs as a verb in Rabbinic Hebrew, but the meaning used by Ibn-Tibbon reflects a semantic shift in comparison with its original rabbinic meaning.
106Piel: only one verbal noun is created by Ibn-Tibbon in the qiṭṭūl pattern (example 22). As with the previous examples, the rootexists in the Piel stem in Rabbinic Hebrew, but not as a verbal noun.
107(22)
108: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘like … weaving, writing, warehousing; hiring gardeners, workmen and agricultural labourers’.80
109Hitpael: six verbal nouns in hitqaṭṭǝlūt pattern are neologisms of Ibn-Tibbon (examples 23–28):
110(23)
111(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘… is scarcer and harder to obtain’.81
112(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘abandonment of transgressions while one has the capacity and opportunity to commit them’.82
113(24)
114: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘he should also consider that… he is freed from the heavy burden of maintaining relatives and fulfilling obligations to them’.83
115(25)
116These two forms occur in different manuscripts containing Ibn-Tibbon’s translation of Duties of the Hearts as free variations.
117(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘their endeavour was first to ascertain and establish general principles, and make clear what is permitted and what is forbidden’.84
118(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the fear that death may suddenly overtake him increases his effort and zeal’.85
119(c): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘he worked an hour… industriously and zealously’.86
120(d): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘you will not fulfil your wishes, however long you strive for them’.87
121(e): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘it should not enter his mind that he can secure its continuance by his striving’.88
122(f): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘If they bring him a profit, he lauds them, and praises his own diligence in using and choosing them’.89
123(26)
124: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘that cannot be discharged, save with the cooperation of another person in mutual relationship, one of them active, the other passive’.90
125(27)
126Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the least increase of your power over him regard as important, so that it may be to you a step to a greater victory’.91
127(28)
128: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘the forces that uphold the latter evil disposition are superfluity of speech, excessive social intercourse’.92
129The roots andall exist in the Hitpael stem in Rabbinic Hebrew, but do not occur as verbal nouns. The roots
and
also exist in Rabbinic Hebrew, but the relevant meanings of these roots are semantic neologisms coined by Ibn-Tibbon.
3.6 Linear word-formation: Rabbinic stems
130Five of Ibn-Tibbon’s neologisms in this translation were created by deriving new lexemes from rabbinic stems. Four of them (examples 29–32) are adjectives that were derived with the suffix - ī, while one of them (example 33) is an abstract noun that was created with the suffix -ūt.
131The suffix -ī: this suffix, yāʾ an-nisba, was originally used in Semitic languages for expressing relationships (mostly with regard to tribes, families, and places), and it appears in Hebrew already in Biblical Hebrew. In Medieval Hebrew, mostly due to the influence of Arabic, and Ibn-Tibbon’s contribution, the use of this suffix widened, creating a wide variety of semantic meanings.93
132(29)
133The lexemein rabbinic Hebrew means mainly ‘air, space, gap, weather’. With the suffix -ī, Ibn-Tibbon created a lexeme that means ‘a resemblance to air’. Judging from the Arabic original, it is reasonable to assume that Ibn-Paquda meant here ‘a resemblance to fire’ and this lexeme was in fact created due to a mistake on the part of Ibn-Tibbon.94
134: Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘to this human body God has joined a spiritual and ethereal entity akin to the spirituality of the higher beings’.95
135Examples 30 and 31 represent two lexemes that were formed by using the same rabbinic stem (see example 9) and two different realisations of the suffix -ī. Apparently the realisation -anī in ּ ג ּ ינפו was created under direct Arabic influence of the lexeme. However, it is not clear why two separate and different forms were created by Ibn-Tibbon.
136(30)
137(a): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘occupying themselves in these concerns, with their physical senses, only when it is necessary and urgent, because they regard this world cheaply’.96
138(b): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘one of them is love of physical pleasures — eating, drinking, excessive gratification of the sexual impulse and other bodily needs’.97
139(31)
140: Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
Hyamson: ‘another said that abstinence means denying oneself all relaxation and physical pleasure’.98
141According to Ben-Yehuda,99 the nounis the verbal noun of the verb
‘to count’ in the Qal stem. The rabbinic meanings of
are ‘number’ (a synonym for the Hebrew word
and ‘counting’ (a synonym to the Hebrew word
. Only in medieval Hebrew does the lexeme
acquire the meaning of a group of ten men. In his creation of the word
Ibn-Tibbon uses the original rabbinic meaning.
142It is interesting to note that in Ibn-Tibbon’s translation method, which is at times literal and at times contextual, the adjectivein the following examples correlates alternatively with the Arabic maṣdar — equivalent (a) — and with an Arabic adjective — equivalent (b):
143(32)
144(a):100 Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘they approached subjects belonging to abstract thought, mathematics and applied sciences; they rent the curtain that kept them from seeing ways that are hidden’.101
145(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘that unity preceded it, just as the numeral one precedes the remaining numbers’.102
146The suffix -ūt: this suffix, which expresses abstract ideas, has its origin in III-waw nouns to which the feminine suffix -t was added, e.g.,. Its use was later expanded to non-III-waw roots, consequently forming part of new nominal patterns, e.g., qǝṭilūt, qaṭlūt, hiqqaṭǝlūt, and hitqaṭṭǝlūt — probably due to Aramaic influence, where this suffix is used to form the verbal noun.103
147(33)
148This lexeme was created by the suffixation ofto the lexeme
All four equivalents below have the meanings ‘unimportance’ and ‘vice’:
149(a): Ibn-Paquda:
Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘if you use so much diligence and effort to further the well-being of your body, despite its pettiness and unworthiness’.104
150(b): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘do you realize how faulty and mean your behaviour in this regard has been?’.105
151(c): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘O my God, neither my ignorance of my insignificance, nor my little knowledge of Thy greatness’.106
152(d): Ibn-Paquda:
; Ibn-Tibbon:
; Hyamson: ‘since this is so, it would be a manifest degradation and a despicable error to trouble my soul with this world and set my thought upon it’.107
4. Conclusion
153From the examples presented above, it is obvious that rabbinic Hebrew was a significant part of the nominal lexicon used by Judah Ibn-Tibbon to translate Duties of the Hearts, whether he included rabbinic lexemes that were used with no morphological or semantic changes, biblical lexemes with semantic shifts that occurred in rabbinic Hebrew, rabbinic lexemes that were given new meanings by Ibn-Tibbon, or morphological neologisms that were created by Ibn-Tibbon himself.
154As previously noted, this small demonstration serves to indicate the state of the lexicon in Ibn-Tibbon’s translations. Aside from several semantic shifts, which are relatively rare in all periods of Hebrew (i.e., ellipsis and folk etymology), it seems that Ibn-Tibbon used a systematic method for expanding the lexicon according to his needs and the Arabic original. The demonstration here presents this method and its basic components. Nevertheless, we should take into consideration the fact that this method was not employed exclusively with Rabbinic Hebrew by Ibn-Tibbon, for he used the same approach and principles when enriching the lexicon with lexemes from all periods of Hebrew. It seems that methodologically, Ibn-Tibbon was familiar with semantic processes and with the grammatical characteristics of Hebrew and Arabic and that he unquestionably knew how to use them in order to enrich the Hebrew lexicon.
155As can be seen in the above examples, the same Hebrew lexeme is frequently used to translate several Arabic equivalents. This obviously reflects the condition of medieval Hebrew, and especially the richness of, and variety in, the Arabic lexicon, in comparison with the insufficiency of Hebrew. Although this is the case with most of the Hebrew entries, one should take into consideration that, at times, the opposite occurred, when the same Arabic lexeme had several Hebrew equivalents. Frequently Ibn-Tibbon created neologisms by adding suffixes to an existing Hebrew lexeme (a lexeme from an earlier stage of Hebrew or a neologism of his own). This suggests a moderately automatic way for creating neologisms and enriching the Hebrew lexicon. Similarly, for Ibn-Tibbon the creation of verbal nouns and nouns from existing Hebrew roots has become a productive method for new lexemes.
156Semantically, the lexicon of Rabbinic Hebrew in this translation is varied. An analysis of all the rabbinic entries suggests that the semantic fields from which they were taken were rich and broad, and they correlate with all the subjects Ibn-Paquda deals with in his book: Halakhah (Jewish law), nature, proficiency, economics, time, the human body, faith, knowledge, society, and culture.
157In light of all that has been stated above, I have some reservations regarding the declarations of Jewish authors and translators about the state of Hebrew in their era. Although classical Hebrew did not provide all the vocabulary needed in medieval times, it did provide the linguistic and lexical bases on which the lexicon could be evolved. Therefore, as I mentioned above, I believe that these statements regarding the ‘insufficiency of Hebrew’ reflect the approach of these authors and translators to the purity of Hebrew, and not only to the state of the language: Classical Hebrew supplied all their lexical and morphological needs, and enabled them to create neologisms. Because they needed the neologisms to translate and compose different works, they had to ‘violate’ the principle of preserving Hebrew as an ancient and holy language.
Notes de bas de page
1 This article is based on some of the findings presented in my PhD dissertation, supervised by Matthew Morgenstern and Tamar Zewi: Barak Avirbach, “The Translation Method of R. Judah Ibn-Tibbon: Issues of Version and Lexicon in His Translation of ‘The Duties of the Hearts’ by R. Bahye Ibn-Paquda” (Haifa University, 2015). These findings were also presented at the 2016 International Workshop on Rabbinic Hebrew, University of Cambridge.
2 Israel Zinberg, A History of Jewish Literature, vol. 1: The Arabic-Spanish Period (transl. Bernard Levin; Cleveland: Press of Case Western Reserve University, 1972), p. 117; Yehuda Isenberg, “Reason and Emotion in ‘Duties of the Heart’” (in Hebrew), Daat 7 (1981), pp. 5–35; Georges Vajda, “Baḥya (Bahye) Ben Joseph Ibn Paquda”, in: Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik (eds.), Encyclopaedia Judaica (2nd ed.; Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), vol. 3, pp. 66–67.
3 Zinberg, A History. It is possible that this is the main reason for the fact that we know so little about Ibn-Paquda himself: the focus was on his writings, while the author was forgotten.
4 Yosef Qafiḥ, Torat Ḥovot ha-Levavot: The Origial Arabic Text with a New Hebrew Translation (in Hebrew and Judaeo-Arabic; Jerusalem: Akiva Yosef, 1973), p. 8.
5 Eliezer Schweid, Our Great Philosophers (in Hebrew; Tel-Aviv: Yediot Ahronot, 1999), p. 60. I am currently working on a new publication of this remnant, which has already been published in three different editions by Adolph Jellinek (Leipzig, 1846), David Sluzki (Moscow, 1871), and Avraham Tsifroni (Jerusalem, 1928). I am comparing these editions of the text with the original manuscript (Leipzig UBL B.H. 39), in order to focus on some major inaccuracies in the printed editions.
6 Ira Robinson, “The Ibn Tibbon Family: A Dynasty of Translators in Medieval ‘Provence’”, in: Jay M. Harris (ed.), Beʾerot Yitshak: Studies in Memory of Isadore Twersky (Cambridge: Center for Jewish Studies, Harvard University, 2005), pp. 193–224, at p. 199.
7 Ibid., p. 200.
8 Ibid., p. 201.
9 See, for example, the opinions of Saadia Gaon in Ha-Egron (ed. Allony, p. 151), of Ibn-Janaḥ in Sefer ha-Riqmah (ed. Vilenski, p. 11), and of Judah Halevi in Ha-Kuzari, for which see Yosef Qafiḥ (ed.), Sefer ha-kuzari (Kiryat Ono: Makhon Mishnat ha-Rambam, 1977), pp. 80–82.
10 Towards the end of the Translator’s Preface to the Ḥovot ha-Levavot, p. 5, in the Moscow edition (Torat Ḥovot ha-Levavot, Moscow: Goldman, 1875).
11 See his apologetic remark, ibid.
12 For all entries see my PhD dissertation, Avirbach, “The Translation Method of R. Judah Ibn-Tibbon”.
13 New meanings for lexemes which occur in Classical Hebrew.
14 New lexemes which were created by using existing morphological elements.
15 Compound noun which did not occur in Classical Hebrew but were based on Classical Hebrew lexemes.
16 In this paper I will not discuss phrases of any kind.
17 As it appears in Qafiḥ, Torat Ḥovot ha-Levavot. Words in angle brackets refer to portions of the Arabic original which were not translated by Ibn-Tibbon.
18 Duties of the Heart, with English translation by Moses Hyamson (5 vols., New York: Bloch Publishing 1925–1945; repr. Jerusalem: Kiryah Neʾemanah, 1965). Hereafter: Hyamson.
19 For the biblical meaning see Francis Brown, Samuel R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906), p. 7; for the rabbinic meaning see Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit ha-Yeshana ve-ha-Ḥadasha (Berlin: Langenscheidt, 1908–1959), pp. 7–8.
20 The unity of God, chapter 10.
21 The service of God, chapter 5.
22 Spiritual accounting, chapter 3.
23 Introduction.
24 This is also the opinion expressed in Qafiḥ, Sefer ha-Kuzari, and in Hyamson.
25 Brown-Driver-Briggs, Lexicon, p. 338; Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit, p. 1659.
26 The service of God, chapter 3.
27 Brown-Driver-Briggs, Lexicon, p. 476
28 Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit, pp. 2346–2347.
29 Examination of creation, chapter 5.
30 Ibid.
31 Brown-Driver-Briggs, Lexicon, p. 996; Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit, p. 6934.
32 Repentance, opening.
33 On whether this is a case of guttural weakening or of Aramaic influence, see Shimon Sharvit, “The Verbal Noun Patternin Tannaitic Hebrew”, in: Aharon Maman, Steven E. Fassberg, and Yochanan Breuer (eds.), Shaʿarei Lashon: Studies in Hebrew, Aramaic and Jewish Languages Presented to Moshe Bar-Asher, vol. 2: Rabbinic Hebrew and Aramaic (in Hebrew; Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2007), pp. 301–322, at p. 304; Uri Mor, Judean Hebrew: The Language of the Hebrew Documents from Judea Between the First and the Second Revolts (Jerusalem: The Academy of Hebrew Language, 2015), p. 91 n. 53, and the references there.
34 The service of God, chapter 4.
35 The love of God, chapter 7.
36 Examination of creation, chapter 6.
37 Abstinence, chapter 5.
38 Spiritual accounting, chapter 3.
39 For references see the Maagarim on-line database of the Academy of the Hebrew Language.
40 Trust in God, opening.
41 Spiritual accounting, chapter 6.
42 The service of God, chapter 4.
43 The service of God, chapter 3.
44 Examination of creation, opening.
45 The love of God, chapter 3.
46 Spiritual accounting, chapter 3.
47 The unity of God, chapter 7.
48 Examination of creation, chapter 3.
49 The love of God, chapter 1. For the words inside the angle brackets see note 16 above.
50 The service of God, chapter 3.
51 The unity of God, chapter 6.
52 Spiritual accounting, chapter 3.
53 The unity of God, chapter 8.
54 Introduction.
55 The service of God, chapter 1.
56 The unity of God, chapter 6.
57 Introduction.
58 The service of God, chapter 4.
59 Abstinence, chapter 2.
60 Spiritual accounting, chapter 4.
61 For further discussion and examples, see Avirbach, “The translation method of R. Judah Ibn-Tibbon”, pp. 358–359.
62 Humility, chapter 6.
63 Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit, pp. 811.
64 Introduction.
65 E.g., Gen. 8.15.
66 Examination of creation, chapter 5.
67 Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit, pp. 640.
68 E.g., Avraham Even-Shoshan, Milon Even-Shoshan (6 vols.; Tel-Aviv: Hamilon Heḥadash, 2003), Yaakov Knaani, Otsar ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit (18 vols.; Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv: Masada, 1960–1989); Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit.
69 The unity of God, chapter 9.
70 The unity of God, chapter 2.
71 Repentance, chapter 9.
72 Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit, pp. 7493–7494.
73 The love of God, chapter 7.
74 Abstinence, chapter 1.
75 Examination of creation, chapter 5.
76 Spiritual accounting, chapter 3.
77 The love of God, chapter 7.
78 Repentance, chapter 7.
79 Examination of creation, chapter 5.
80 Trust in God, chapter 3.
81 Examination of creation, chapter 5.
82 Repentance, chapter 5.
83 Trust in God, chapter 4.
84 Introduction.
85 Trust in God, chapter 5.
86 Examination of creation, chapter 3.
87 The service of God, chapter 5.
88 The service of God, chapter 7.
89 Trust in God, chapter 5.
90 Trust in God, chapter 4.
91 Wholehearted devotion, chapter 5.
92 The service of God, chapter 5.
93 See e.g., Noah Shapira, “The Development of the Terminology of Chemistry in Hebrew” (in Hebrew), Leshonenu 24 (1960), pp. 95–105.
94 Qafiḥ, Torat Ḥovat ha-Levavot, p. 108.
95 Examination of creation, chapter 5.
96 Repentance, chapter 10.
97 The service of God, chapter 5.
98 Abstinence, chapter 2.
99 Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit, pp. 3096–3097.
100 For this meaning of the root, cf. Joshua Blau, A Dictionary of Mediaeval Judaeo-Arabic Texts (Jerusalem: The Academy of the Hebrew Language and The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities), p. 421.
101 Repentance, chapter 9.
102 The unity of God, chapter 7.
103 See, e.g., Hans Bauer and Pontus Leander, Historische Grammatik der hebräischen Sprache (Halle: Niemeyer, 1922), pp. 505–506; Emil Kautzsch (ed.), Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (2nd English edition, trans. by Arthur E. Cowley; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910), p. 241 (§86k); Raphael Nir, Word-formation in modern Hebrew (in Hebrew; Tel-Aviv: The Open University Press, 1993), pp. 75–76. Cf. also Zeʾev Ben-Ḥayyim’s note at the end of Aharon Reuveni’s “Letter to the Editor”, Leshonenu 16 (1949), pp. 223–224.
104 Spiritual accounting, chapter 3.
105 Ibid.
106 Ibid.
107 Wholehearted devotion, chapter 5.
Auteur
Is a lecturer at the Department of Hebrew Language and at the MEd program, Oranim Academic College of Education, Tivon (Israel). His main research interest is Medieval Hebrew and Judaeo-Arabic, especially aspects of its lexicon, morphology, syntax, philology, translation studies and mutual influence. In his doctoral dissertation he presented a philological survey of the witnesses to Ibn-Tibbon’s translation of Ibn-Paquda’s Duties of the Hearts, and composed a Hebrew–Arabic glossary of the entire nominal lexicon in this translation.

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International - CC BY 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Studies in Semitic Vocalisation and Reading Traditions
Aaron D. Hornkohl et Geoffrey Khan (dir.)
2020
Diversity and Rabbinization
Jewish Texts and Societies between 400 and 1,000 CE
Gavin McDowell, Ron Naiweld et Daniel Stökl Ben Ezra (dir.)
2021