[b-hebrew] qamatz gadol qamatz qatan
kwrandolph at gmail.com
Fri Jan 27 10:46:39 EST 2012
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 6:09 AM, Isaac Fried <if at math.bu.edu> wrote:
> The lack of vowel after the S of ASNAT is in line with the NAQDANIYM's
> habit of economizing on the number of vowels in a Hebrew word, giving
> thereby the language a crisp pleasant (at least to my ears listening to my
> lips) sound: NAP$-KA, B-$IBT-KA, U-B-LEKT-KA, U-B-$AKB-KA, TI-ZKR-U
> נַפְשְׁךָ, בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ, וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ, וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ, תִּזְכְּרוּ
As far as I can tell, they did not invent their pronunciation nor economize
on the number of vowels, rather they merely recorded a tradition that had
been building up for a while and had been handed to them.
> If I understand it correctly, you are saying that the double n in the
> Greek rendering of the name is merely to indicate that the stress is on NE
> – to read the name as aseNEt.
Go back to my original answer, it merely says that the preceding vowel is
present but unstressed.
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
Karl W. Randolph.
> On Jan 26, 2012, at 8:01 PM, K Randolph wrote:
> Look at the Masoretic points, and you can see that the second vowel had
> completely dropped out by the time of the Masoretes. What the doubled
> consonant following that second vowel in the LXX indicates is that the
> preceding vowel is unstressed at the time of the LXX pronunciation, but
> still present.
> But even the LXX pronunciation is not the same as Biblical pronunciation.
> The latter has been lost, and I see no way it can be recovered. But we can
> still read the text.
> Karl W. Randolph.
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Isaac Fried <if at math.bu.edu> wrote:
>> In Gen. 41:45 I see the name אסנת transliterated by the LXX as
>> Ασεννεϑ (why the double n?)
>> In Gen. 26:34 I see the name בשמת transliterated by the LXX as
>> Βασεμμαϑ (why the double m?)
>> Isaac Fried, Boston University
More information about the b-hebrew