Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] consonant vowel order of )EHYEH & YAHWEH

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
  • To: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] consonant vowel order of )EHYEH & YAHWEH
  • Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:04:48 +0100

Peter wrote:
I think this is because of your limitations as an English speaker,
because in English the sound [h] is never used at the end of a syllable.
However, for speakers of some other languages e.g. Arabic which use
syllable final [h], and for those trained in phonetics like myself, this
syllable final [h] is not a problem at all. And it doesn't seem to have
been a problem for Hebrew speakers at one time - but it may have become
one later, for there is a tendency in later editions of the Hebrew Bible
to replace silent sheva under he and under other "guttural" consonants
with a non-silent "composite sheva". But this is certainly not an
argument that there was originally a vowel in the middle of the divine name.
END QUOTE

JCR: This also seems to be a limitation of my ears as well. Because every
time
I listen to a demonstration of someone who claims to be able to do it I
always
hear the 'he' as the start of the new syllable.

I wasn't suggesting that this was proof for an orignal middle syllable in
Yah's
name because I don't hold these points to be the originals anyway. It's just
that
for a long time i have never understood why every other vowel sign the
masoretes
used would have been consistent, while the sheva is (reportedly) used both
vocally and silently.
The silent scheva seems to be completely redundant as it would simply have
sufficed
to have left no sign at the end of a syllable. Would anyone have any
difficulty in
understanding that there is no vowel after the 'he' in )ehyeh? Without the
superfluos
'silent' scheva of ')eh:yeh'?

And let's suppose that the masoretes did have valid reasons for assuming that
indicating the end of a syllable was nessecary. Why would they use the same
symbol
as that used for a vocal schewa if their intention was to indicate the
opposite?
Wasn't their aim to make a consistent system? Rather than add to the
confusion?

While I can accept that my ears and vocal cords may be limited (as a native
English speaker)
I have significant problems overcoming these last hurdles which only seem
self-contradictory.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page