So while scouring the Zohar parshat Vayakhel the other day in search of the Zohar which misused the term "parsha" to mean sidra, I chanced across an interesting one which mentions Pesukei deZimra (קנב) and then one which mentions Yishtabach (קנג).
Now, the gemara does discuss saying Hallel every day, which is interpreted to mean Pesukei deZimra, but it had the status of a reshut. But then, what seems to be post-Talmudically, they established it as part of davening, and put a blessing beforehand (Baruch sheAmar) and after it (Yishtabach). As no Mishna or gemara mentions these blessings, and they seem to surface in the time of the Geonim, it is "weird" for this purportedly Tannaitic source to discuss Yishtabach. Of course, by the time of Rav Moshe de Leon, Yishtabach was already firmly in place. (On the other hand, if the Zohar is indeed entirely an early source, it undermines the argument in my linked-to post. But there are other features of that post that make me believe it to be true.)
Another interesting feature I noticed while skimming through Zohar was the repeated use of תא חזי to introduce statements. Now, this is the Yerushalmi equivalent of תא שמע. (Ta chamei, with a mem, is equivalent.) And it is indeed used over and over again to introduce some brayta, and thus a Tannaitic source. The problem is that in Bavli and Yerushalmi, these are used only in answering a question. Thus, a question is posed by an Amora or by the gemara itself, and various braytot are mustered in support of one side or the other, introduced with ta shema. Yet the way the Zohar is using it is "weird" - just as an introduction of purportedly Tannaitic statements. I know Rashbi was much earlier than the gemara, such that this might be a change in usage with the passage of time, but this does not seem so convincing to me.
Is there any convincing explanation of this phenomenon? Has anyone addressed it?