
What is “philology” in contemporary research? How does it relate to linguistics? Does studying language for the purpose of reading texts legitimise a pre-theoretical approach to language analysis? Is research without an explicit theoretical undergirding (no matter how deep beneath the overt layers of argument) anything more than naive empiricism? This essay addresses a long-standing issue in Biblical Hebrew studies that has recently flared up: is a theory of language necessary for the study of Biblical Hebrew grammar? Rather than a comprehensive review of literature on the study of Biblical Hebrew, this essay is programmatic, weaving questions of discipline, theory, and praxis together to present a case for how Biblical Hebrew linguists ought to orient themselves in the process of collecting and analysing their data.
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
