Today I was thinking about the word teiva תבה. In the entire Bible, it only appears twice: as the word for Noah's ark and for the baby Moshe's basket.
Here is Klein's entry for teivah:
1 ark, box.
NH 2 Holy Ark (in the synagogue).
PBH 3 word.
[Prob. a loan word from Egypt. tbt (= chest; coffin). Arab. tābūt (= box, case, chest, coffer), is a Heb. loan word.]
I can easily understand how the word progressed from meaning 1 ("box") to meaning 2 ("Holy Ark in the synagogue" - although the word for the Ark that carried the Tablets of the Law in the desert is
aron ארון.) But how did
teiva come to mean "word"?
This was surprisingly difficult to research. First of all, the dictionaries that I thought would help me - Ben Yehuda, Jastrow, Klein, Even-Shoshan - all mentioned the various meanings, including "word", but didn't explain the shift in meaning.
Secondly, since the meaning is "word", searching online is really challenging. If I'm looking for a web page or article, I often search for the the term and include the various meanings. That will usually pull up something helpful. But since the meaning is "word" - well, that appears on probably every page. Not really beneficial.
So I had to try a little harder. I did find some discussion of it in the dictionary
Aruch Hashalem by
Alexander Kohut. He says that some claim that
teiva meaning "word" comes from a different source - an Arabic root meaning "to cut." And therefore,
teiva means a word "cut and separate" from other letters in the text.
He then compares
teiva to a common word for "word" -
mila מילה. This word is familiar from the phrase
brit milah ברית מילה - "circumcision." So according to this theory, both
teiva and
mila come from the sense "to cut."
However, this theory is problematic. From their uses in Rabbinic Hebrew (where
teiva first means "word"),
mila refers to spoken words, and
teiva to written words. This also fits the etymology of
mila. Klein points out that
mila meaning circumcision comes from the root מול - "to circumcise", whereas
mila meaning "word" comes from מלל - a root meaning "to speak, to say."
So while "cut" could be still be an origin of
teiva, the parallel to
mila doesn't hold up.
Kohut then provides a second theory, saying that in a
teiva, the letters are connected as if they were in a box. This seems like a more reasonable theory - it keeps the various meanings of
teiva with the same origin, as all of the dictionaries I checked claimed.
A further expansion on this idea is found in the
Hebrew Wiktionary entry for
teiva. The entry provides five meanings found in Biblical and Rabbinic sources:
- boat (Bereshit 7:13, Shemot 2:3)
- box (Mishna Tahorot 8:2)
- ark (closet) that holds the Torah scrolls (Mishna Taanit 2:1)
- a rectangle or square; the rectangle that one word is written in (Talmud Yerushalmi Eruvin 5:1, Talmud Bavli Menachot 30a)
- a word with a space before and after it (Talmud Bavli 30a)
There is a note there saying that meaning 5 derived from meaning 4. This works well with Kohut's second theory. The only issue is that neither example provided in 4 are particularly convincing. The source from the Jerusalem Talmud says, "How did did the Israelites march in the desert? Like a teiva." This means they formed a square (in contrast with the other opinion, which says they marched in a column, like a beam.) That doesn't really mean that teiva meant "rectangle", but only that a rectangle is like a teiva, because of the shape.
The second example, from
Menachot 30a says that when writing a Torah scroll, the space between one
teiva and another
teiva must be the size of one small letter. While I suppose it's possible that
teiva there could mean the rectangle that contained a word, the simpler meaning is that it just meant the space between one word and the following word. And the Wiktionary entry itself provides a quote from the same page in Menachot where
teiva clearly means "word"!
Now, if I could find some evidence that all words were enclosed in rectangles, there would be more support for this theory. I'm not a scribe, so I can't speak from personal experience, and I couldn't find any mention of that in the sources I checked. And the nature of Wiki editing prevents me from contacting the person who wrote this theory. But if any of you out there have any proof, or even suggestions, one way or another - please let me know!