The most authentic portrait of Second Temple Hebrew is afforded by the Dead Sea Scrolls, especially by those texts actually composed in Hellenistic and Roman times. On salient linguistic points Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew agrees with the vocalization of the Tiberian reading tradition against the testimony of the written, i.e., consonantal, tradition of Masoretic Classical Biblical Hebrew material. This article presents a case study. On the one hand, these Dead Sea-Tiberian vocalization affinities are evidence of the relatively late character of their respective linguistic traditions and of the secondary character of the developments in the Tiberian reading tradition vis-à-vis the classical biblical written tradition. On the other hand, these same affinities demonstrate that the Tiberian pronunciation tradition is plausibly regarded as one that crystallized in the Second Temple Period, rather than in Byzantine or medieval times. Lastly, since joint Dead Sea-Tiberian reading departures from the classical biblical consonantal tradition constitute a tiny minority of their relevant linguistic data, most of which are characterized by historical continuity and/or linguistic heterogeneity of comparable historical depth, it is clear that the Second Temple crystallization of Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew and the Tiberian reading tradition in no way preclude their routine preservation of authentic Iron Age features.

死海古卷，特别是古希腊和罗马时期实际撰写的那些文字，为希伯来语第二圣殿提供了最真实的画像。在重要的语言学观点上，《死海古卷》希伯来语与提伯利亚阅读传统的发声方式相吻合，而不是马索里奇古典圣经希伯来语材料的书面（辅音）传统的证词。本文介绍了一个案例研究。一方面，这些死海-提比利亚人的发声亲和力证明了他们各自的语言传统相对较晚的特征，以及相对于古典圣经书面传统而言，提比利亚的阅读传统发展的次要特征。另一方面，这些相同的相似性表明，泰伯利亚的发音传统被认为是在第二圣殿时期而不是拜占庭时期或中世纪形成的一种发音传统。最后，由于死海-泰伯利亚的联合阅读偏离了经典的圣经辅音传统，因此仅占其相关语言数据的极小部分，其中大多数具有历史连续性和/或可比的历史深度的语言异质性，因此很明显死海古卷希伯来文和泰伯利亚读书传统的神庙结晶丝毫不妨碍他们对铁器时代地道特色的例行保存。