As English dominates technology, global media and international communication, Israeli scholars say that Hebrew faces growing pressure and that the state-backed Academy of the Hebrew Language is playing a more urgent role in preserving the language’s distinct identity while guiding its evolution.
“The Hebrew language has absorbed over the years words derived from other languages such as Persian, Greek and even Yiddish,” Esther Boylan, instructor in Judaic studies at Touro University’s Lander College for Women, told JNS.
“With the great explosion of words in English associated with modernity and technology, if the academy would not seek to foster continuity with the past, Hebrew would be overwhelmed and could lose its identity altogether,” Boylan said.
Founded in 1953 and based at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem’s Givat Ram campus, the Academy of the Hebrew Language is Israel’s official authority on Hebrew grammar, spelling, transliteration and terminology.
The institution now operates against the backdrop of widespread English-language technology, expanding social-media use and global-cultural exchange.
‘A new phenomenon’
The academy introduces new Hebrew terms through a structured process that combines professional expertise with public inquiry, according to Barak Dan, academic secretary of the academy.
“The academy determines the need for new Hebrew words through both professional demand and public inquiry,” Dan told JNS.
Professional committees composed of specialists and grammarians from fields that include medicine, engineering, finance, archaeology and geography identify gaps in terminology and craft appropriate Hebrew forms.
A separate committee addresses general-use vocabulary requested directly by the public. The academy receives roughly 800 monthly inquiries, though only some involve term requests, according to Dan.
New proposals pass through a central terminology committee and then the academy committee of linguists, poets, translators and other experts. Because the academy prioritizes precision and clarity, approval can take months or even years, he said.
Much professional terminology goes unnoticed by the public, while general-use terms enter everyday speech frequently. When possible, the academy tries to revive older Hebrew words, according to Dan.
“When coining new words and terms, it is always best if one can revive words with close meaning in ancient Hebrew texts and compositions, such as the Bible and Mishnah,” he said.
He cited chemet, a biblical Hebrew term for a vessel to carry water, which means a hydration pack in modern Hebrew. The latter was chosen despite common colloquial use of the Yiddish-influenced shluker to mean water vessel, he said.
When no historical equivalent exists, the academy uses Hebrew’s root-and-pattern system to form new terms, weighing historical depth, clarity and linguistic integrity, according to Dan.
Acceptance is not always immediate, he noted, as with monit (“taxi”), derived from moneh (“taximeter”), which took decades to become standard.
The continued rise of English, which is accelerated by digital platforms, adds new unpredictability to public adoption, according to Boylan.
“In the past, adoption by the masses has been a most significant factor. However, social media is a new phenomenon in the history of Hebrew, and it is difficult to predict the role it will ultimately play,” she told JNS. “I would think adoption by the Hebrew-speaking public will remain the determinant factor.”
Debates inside the academy reflect those changing realities. Dan described discussions over whether ideological terms such as “capitalism” or “fundamentalism” should be fully Hebraized or remain borrowed.
The academy approved yesodanut, from the Hebrew word yesod (“foundation”), as the term for “fundamentalism.”
Public usage continues to shape outcomes. “Millions of Hebrew speakers ultimately determine which coined terms survive,” Dan told JNS.
Some suggested words, such as meshoshah (“antenna”), fail to take hold, while others find success decades later. He noted that michlalah, originally proposed by Eliezer Ben-Yehuda for “university,” is now commonly used to mean “college.”
The academy also responds to political discourse. Dan cited memshelet tzlalim (“shadow government”), which became widely used, followed by the academy’s approval of medinat tzlalim (“shadow state”) to parallel the increasingly common English phrase “deep state.”
Beyond creating new terms, the academy sets standards for grammar, spelling and transliteration—influencing schools, government publications and multilingual signage—all areas increasingly affected by digital communication.
Amid technology-driven linguistic change, both scholars say the institution’s mission is newly consequential.
Boylan warned that without the academy’s efforts to maintain continuity with classical Hebrew sources, English dominance could erode linguistic identity. Dan said that while the academy seeks to strengthen Hebrew forms, entrenched foreign terms such as “telephone” and “radio” are accepted when firmly rooted in usage.
