Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Judges 16:30 - Verb with no use, MY PROBLEM!

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net
  • To: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>, Chris and Nel <wattswestmaas AT eircom.net>
  • Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Judges 16:30 - Verb with no use, MY PROBLEM!
  • Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 22:26:55 +0000

Hello Peter,

I am curious about your statement about WAYIH:YW = become as opposed to
'were.' What do you think is the difference btw Judges 16:30 and Genesis
2:25?

WAYIH:YW $N"HEM `RWMMIYM.... would you translate this as "They became
naked.." or am I misreading your point? Thanks

--
Kelton Graham
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message --------------
From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>

> On 03/10/2006 18:08, Chris and Nel wrote:
> > ... I am so used to
> > reading sentences without "to be " in them that I still can not fathom
> > its
> > purpose here, considering that without it I actually arrived at the
> > correct
> > translation without looking at the English.
> >
> > Now can someone be kind enough pleeeease..... to relieve me of my making
> > a
> > fool of
> > myself on this board?
> >
> >
> The distinction may be that sentences in which "to be" is omitted are
> usually (always?) stative, indicating a continuing state, like English
> "be", whereas those starting with WAYHIY, and here with its plural form
> WAYIHYUW, indicate actions, like English "became". Thus a literal
> translation would be "And the dead... became more than the dead...". The
> meaning is of course "More people died... than...", an action. A
> translation like Kelton's "Those who were dead ... *were* many, more
> than..." is misleading because it suggests a state, a count of bodies
> already dead. But in fact we have an action here, a large number of
> people dying. (Dare I suggest a prototype of today's suicide bombers,
> except here we have an Israelite killing Gentiles in Gaza?)
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> E-mail: peter AT qaya.org
> Blog: http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
> Website: http://www.qaya.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>From leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il Tue Oct 3 19:06:56 2006
Return-Path: <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mtaout1.012.net.il (mtaout1.012.net.il [84.95.2.1])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6C74C00D
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 19:06:55 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from xp ([87.68.49.91])
by i_mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12)
with SMTP id <0J6L00I6R1SWY421 AT i_mtaout1.012.net.il> for
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Wed, 04 Oct 2006 01:12:38 +0200 (IST)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 01:05:40 +0200
From: Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-id: <000e01c6e740$727fa910$a8eb15ac@xp>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <200610031822.k93IMVn24403342 AT tamar.os.biu.ac.il>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.8
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Kamatz katan
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 23:06:56 -0000

The problem with this assumption, is the plain fact that the kamatz =
katan fulfills a perfectly valid function. Every vowel in Hebrew has a =
long and short form: Tsere and segol for E, hiriq with or without a yod =
for I, shuruq and qubutz for U, and also Kamatz (gadol) and Patah for A. =
Since the "vav" of the Holam is fairly arbitrary and does not effect =
pronounciation, there would have to be a symbol for the short O, to be =
used whenever a short vowel is called for. This is especially true of =
the Hataph-kamatz. In all other cases the Hataph only goes with a short =
vowels - Hataph patah and hataph segol. Just as there is no such thing =
as a hataph-tsere, the fact that there is a hataph-kamatz shows that the =
kamatz is meant to be a "shorth" one.

Yigal Levin
----- Original Message -----=20
From: YODAN=20
To: leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il=20
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:20 PM
Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] Kamatz katan; Ashkenazi pronunciation;was: =
Translating


I believe that it is well established that the Masoretes used an =
identical pronunciation for what grammarians later classified as two =
types of Kamatz vowels. The Masoretic pronunciation is believed to be =
like the English "au" or "aw" similar to that of traditional Ashkenazi =
and Yemenite pronunciations of these vowels (which are pronounced =
identically in these two pronunciations). =20

=20

The fact that the original symbol of kamatz (see the Leningrad Codex =
and Aleppo Codex) was not like a T letter (which is the current symbol =
of both Kamatz vowels) but, rather, as a horizontal line under which =
there is a dot. This is believed to reflect the pronunciation of kamatz =
by the Masoretes - as something in between Patah (ah) and Holam (oh) - =
which is how au or aw is pronounced.

=20

The Sephardi pronunciation, which did not develop from the Masoretic =
pronunciation but, rather, from the other Israeli pronunciation (called =
sometimes "Palestinian" Hebrew, reflecting the name of the Land of =
Israel during the Roman period and beyond. having nothing to do with the =
current use of "Palestinian") had two different pronunciations for what =
the Masoretes had a single pronunciation. The Sephardi pronunciation =
for kamatz that developed from an original long AH is kamatz gadol (or =
Rahav) and is pronounced by Sepharadim (and now also in Israeli Hebrew) =
like Patah, whereas the kamatz that developed from an original UH vowel =
is called kamatz katan (hatuf) and is pronounced in Sepharadi and =
Israeli Hebrew as OH (like Holam). In practically all cases of kamatz =
katan there is an underlying word with kubutz or shuruk (UH) or holam =
(OH) vowel, and this is a useful way to recognize kamatz katan, =
particularly in cases where applying kamatz katan rules is not =
straightforward (especially when it's difficult to decide if a shva is =
naH or nA).

=20

Rivka Sherman-Gold

Yodan Publishing

=20

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org =
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of =
leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 6:18 AM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Kamatz katan; Ashkenazi pronunciation;was: =
Translating

=20

I think that the real question about the Kamatz katan is not when its

pronounced - the rules are pretty clear, though there are different

customs. The real question is, why the mesoretes used the same symbol =
for

two different (albeit related) vowels: the long a and the short o. =
Could it

be that THEY pronounced them both the same? If so, how, as a long a or =
as a

short o?

=20

Yigal Levin

=20

Original Message:

-----------------

From: Vadim Cherny VadimCherny AT mail.ru

Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 10:36:51 +0300

To: yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Kamatz katan; Ashkenazi pronunciation;was:

Translating

=20

=20

From: "Yitzhak Sapir"

> Why is this so? My working explanation is starts with the fact that

> among the many situations in Semitic that later developed to a =
qamatz

> in Hebrew, is a large class of instances that had a long "a". =
Hebrew

> Phoenician, and Canaanite developed long "a" into "o". Aramaic and

> Arabic did not. The qamatz was part of this "long a to o" change. =
This

> is the point where the Massoretes codified the vowels, so this is =
the

> stage the vowels represent. It appears to me, that later, probably =
under

> Arabic influence (which did not have the long a to o change), the =
words

> which had Arabic parallels with a long a, were reread with the =
qamats

> signifying "long a" again. In non-Arabic speaking countries, this =
did not

> happen. This change is one of the basic differences between =
"Ashkenazi"

> pronunciation and "Sefardi" pronunciation, Sefardi signifying spain =
and

> Arabic speaking countries, while Ashkanzi signifies other European

> countries. However, the Massoretes also used a qamats in situations

> that originally developed from other "non long a" cases. The Arabic =
did

> not have a "long a" in those cases and so did not influence the =
reading of

> Hebrew. Those are the situations of "qamats qatan", where the =
original

> qamats sound of "ow" remained. This is one such case. The original

> Semitic root behind this word is ")ukl", and this developed in =
Biblical

> Hebrew, without a suffix, as ")okel". Here, because of the suffix, =
the

"o"

> in ")okel" apparently became the "ow" of a "qamats".

=20

The difference between kamatz and kamatz katan is rather simple.

Kamatz becomes katan in closed unaccented syllables.

Long a shortens to short o. [Long a elongates to au - long o. =
Similarly,

short a + u produces short o.]

=20

The difference between Sephardi and Ashkenazi is also clear. It =
relates to

Germanized initial stress shift.

davAr - dAvar (initial stress shift of Germanized pronunciation) - =
dA:var

(elongation of open stressed vowel) - dOvar (a: - au - o) - dOv'r

(post-tonic vowel reduced without gemination). Now, there appears a =
problem

that two similar kamatz in davar are read differently. To solve that, =
open

stressed syllable is closed with iod which protects the next vowel, =
dOv'r -

dOivor. First o is long, the second is short.

=20

I discuss those transformations at the end of

http://vadimcherny.org/hebrew/protohewbrew_single_vowel.htm

=20

Vadim Cherny

=20

_______________________________________________

b-hebrew mailing list

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

=20

=20

--------------------------------------------------------------------

mail2web - Check your email from the web at

http://mail2web.com/ .

=20

=20

_______________________________________________

b-hebrew mailing list

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page