Papers by Kaspars Ozolins
Vetus Testamentum, 2022
The text of 2 Sam 21:19 states in summary fashion that a certain Elhanan, son of Jaare-oregim the... more The text of 2 Sam 21:19 states in summary fashion that a certain Elhanan, son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite, killed Goliath the Gittite in battle (thus, in apparent contradiction to the famous extended pericope of 1 Sam 17). A text-critical reconstruction of the verse is presented which accounts for the relationship between "the Bethlehemite" in 2 Sam 21:19 and the name "Lahmi" which is recorded as belonging to Goliath's brother in 1 Chr 20:5. Along these lines it is further argued that a text-critical analysis is a viable option for resolving the tension with 1 Sam 17, without the need to resort to additional literary or source-critical solutions.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Ceļš, 2020
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Drafts by Kaspars Ozolins
The text of 2 Samuel 21:19 states in summary fashion that a certain Elhanan, son of Jaare-oregim ... more The text of 2 Samuel 21:19 states in summary fashion that a certain Elhanan, son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite, killed Goliath the Gittite in battle (thus, in apparent contradiction to the famous extended pericope of 1 Sam 17). In this paper, a brief survey of proposals advanced thus far is covered, followed by discussion of the textual reconstruction of the names of both David’s hero and the giant he slew. The reconstruction defended here is based on: (1) the identification of Elhanan as a Bethlehemite in 2 Sam 21:19 (drawing from the testimony of the lists of David’s heroes in 2 Samuel 23:24 and 1 Chronicles 11:26) and (2), the secondary rise of an apparent personal name לחמי ‘Lahmi’ due to scribal error in 1 Chronicles 20:5.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Books by Kaspars Ozolins
A Little Book on the Reformation, 2017
Brief introduction to William Tyndale
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Conference Presentations by Kaspars Ozolins
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
An examination of some of the morphological features of foreign proper names in the Septuagint, e... more An examination of some of the morphological features of foreign proper names in the Septuagint, especially as it relates to their phonological makeup.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Reassessing the Final Sign of the Ugaritic Alphabet, 2021
The Late Bronze Age Ugaritic corpus of texts represents by far the largest collection of alphabet... more The Late Bronze Age Ugaritic corpus of texts represents by far the largest collection of alphabetic texts in the second millennium, B.C. This burst of writing activity thus stands in stark contrast to the relative sparseness of attested alphabetic texts in the second millennium, B.C. Nevertheless, Ugarit is unlikely to have been a unique phenomenon in the Ancient Near East, as much writing on perishable material has undoubtedly been lost to history. As such, careful study of its origins and development can provide potential models regarding the prevalence of writing culture during the earlier phases of the biblical period.
The alphabet itself is an unparalleled melding of Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform practices and Canaanite alphabetic concepts, which is in keeping with the highly cosmopolitan character of this Late Bronze Age city state. Nevertheless, despite its undeniable cross-cultural influences, questions remain about the actual conditions for the origin and development of this unique alphabet. For example, the origin and function of the extra three vowel signs {ả}, {ỉ}, and {ủ}, and in particular the mysterious final sign {ś} are still debated in scholarship.
However, recent scholarship has largely shifted in dating the religious and poetic texts to a much later period, toward the second half of the 13th century. Any diachronic phonological shifts are therefore unlikely to be detected by a study of the extant Ugaritic corpus. Furthermore, even if the {s̀} sign were a late addition in the brief lifespan of Ugaritic writing culture, this would not answer the fundamental issue of why it corresponds to the familiar samekh sign, instead of the ubiquitous {s}. As such, a re-examination of the evidence in light of the attested textual corpus at Ugarit, as well as its connections to the earliest alphabets is therefore a desideratum.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The text of 2 Samuel 21:19 states in summary fashion that a certain Elhanan, son of Jaare-oregim ... more The text of 2 Samuel 21:19 states in summary fashion that a certain Elhanan, son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite, killed Goliath the Gittite in battle (thus, in apparent contradiction to the famous extended pericope of 1 Sam 17). In this paper, a brief survey of proposals advanced thus far is covered, followed by discussion of the textual reconstruction of the names of both David’s hero and the giant he slew. The reconstruction defended here is based on: (1) the identification of Elhanan as a Bethlehemite in 2 Sam 21:19 (drawing from the testimony of the lists of David’s heroes in 2 Samuel 23:24 and 1 Chronicles 11:26) and (2), the secondary rise of an apparent personal name לחמי ‘Lahmi’ due to scribal error in 1 Chronicles 20:5.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Dissertation by Kaspars Ozolins
This dissertation examines the phenomenon of Proto-Indo-European schwebeablaut (German Schwebeabl... more This dissertation examines the phenomenon of Proto-Indo-European schwebeablaut (German Schwebeablaut “floating vowel gradation”), whereby a number of reconstructed forms are observed to alternate in their root shape between CeRC (termed State I) and CReC (termed State II). This mechanism of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root ablaut has long been tacitly accepted (in one form or another) by scholars; however, the only comprehensive treatment has been Anttila (1969), and the matter therefore merits a thorough review. This dissertation reviews material from the daughter languages considered to be evidence for schwebeablaut by using some of the same techniques employed in the work of Anttila, only in an updated fashion. A large majority of the remaining cases are explained without requiring recourse to schwebeablaut, while several more difficult forms are discussed in individual chapters. The second part of the dissertation examines a unique subtype of roots extended by an s-formant that exhibit the following alternation: CeRC : CReC-s. It is argued that the descriptive schwebeablaut inherent in these formations may legitimately be traced to PIE. An Optimality Theoretic account for this phonologically motivated metathesis is offered, which likewise eliminates the need to invoke schwebeablaut (as classically defined).
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Kaspars Ozolins
Drafts by Kaspars Ozolins
Books by Kaspars Ozolins
Conference Presentations by Kaspars Ozolins
The alphabet itself is an unparalleled melding of Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform practices and Canaanite alphabetic concepts, which is in keeping with the highly cosmopolitan character of this Late Bronze Age city state. Nevertheless, despite its undeniable cross-cultural influences, questions remain about the actual conditions for the origin and development of this unique alphabet. For example, the origin and function of the extra three vowel signs {ả}, {ỉ}, and {ủ}, and in particular the mysterious final sign {ś} are still debated in scholarship.
However, recent scholarship has largely shifted in dating the religious and poetic texts to a much later period, toward the second half of the 13th century. Any diachronic phonological shifts are therefore unlikely to be detected by a study of the extant Ugaritic corpus. Furthermore, even if the {s̀} sign were a late addition in the brief lifespan of Ugaritic writing culture, this would not answer the fundamental issue of why it corresponds to the familiar samekh sign, instead of the ubiquitous {s}. As such, a re-examination of the evidence in light of the attested textual corpus at Ugarit, as well as its connections to the earliest alphabets is therefore a desideratum.
Dissertation by Kaspars Ozolins
The alphabet itself is an unparalleled melding of Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform practices and Canaanite alphabetic concepts, which is in keeping with the highly cosmopolitan character of this Late Bronze Age city state. Nevertheless, despite its undeniable cross-cultural influences, questions remain about the actual conditions for the origin and development of this unique alphabet. For example, the origin and function of the extra three vowel signs {ả}, {ỉ}, and {ủ}, and in particular the mysterious final sign {ś} are still debated in scholarship.
However, recent scholarship has largely shifted in dating the religious and poetic texts to a much later period, toward the second half of the 13th century. Any diachronic phonological shifts are therefore unlikely to be detected by a study of the extant Ugaritic corpus. Furthermore, even if the {s̀} sign were a late addition in the brief lifespan of Ugaritic writing culture, this would not answer the fundamental issue of why it corresponds to the familiar samekh sign, instead of the ubiquitous {s}. As such, a re-examination of the evidence in light of the attested textual corpus at Ugarit, as well as its connections to the earliest alphabets is therefore a desideratum.