Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Piel Participles of ayin-waw-yod

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Will Parsons <wbparsons AT alum.mit.edu>
  • To: fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org, randallbuth AT gmail.com
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Piel Participles of ayin-waw-yod
  • Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 21:04:48 -0400 (EDT)

Arnaud, comments on some points...

On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 21:27:19 +0100, "Arnaud Fournet"
<fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> From: "Randall Buth" <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
>
> >>1. Prosody: lost
> >
> > it is not clear that #1 would block communication except at the very
> > first encounters. People get used to hearing languages pronounced
> > 'funny' from speakers of other dialects.
> ***
> Prosody is always a problem when divergent.
> In addition there is no reason to think Ancient Hebrew had so many
> "dialects".
> That language was not sprawling over a whole continent, as far as I know.
> A.
> ***

That wouldn't prevent it from having a lot of dialectual variation. Consider
the case of Greek in ancient times.

> >>4. Glottalized emphatics: lost
> >
> > This assumes that the Ethiopic languages are preserving the
> > original sound and are not areal features borrowed from Cushitic.
> > of course, even with 'retracted-tongue-root' "emphatics" one
> > still has to deal with Tet and Qof assimilating to tav and kaf.
> > Also, Sa(de) with samex (but see #8 below).
> ***

> Hebrew itself very clearly indicates that emphatics must have been
> glottalized in Ancient Hebrew, as vowels are not at all colored in any way
> by emphatics.
> Conclusive.
> A.
> ***

It happens that I agree with you here - the lack of vowel colourization
is strong evidence of emphatics that were realized as glottalized. But still,
is this conclusive? I would say not. I would like to know (from someone
familiar with Yemeni Hebrew pronunciation) if in the Yemenite tradition
(where I believe, emphatics are pronounced as the corresponding sounds in
Arabic) there may in fact be an influence of emphatic consonants on the
adjacent vowels.

> >>8. Affricates: lost (except Tsade)
> >
> > Tsade emically preserves what may have been a pharyngealized sibilant.
> ***
> It represents the fusion of a glottalized affricate and a glottalized
> lateral stop.
> A.
> ***

Too dogmatic by far! What evidence is there that sadhe *was* an affricate
in ancient times? (And no, I don't consider the Codex Vaticanus "evidence"
discussed in a previous thread to be valid.) Or a glottalized lateral stop?
(Actually, I'm not even sure of what a "lateral stop" would be.)

> > So in summation,
> > it appears that these features were already handled in antiquity
> > between speakers of different dialects and it would
> > appear that communication accross the centuries would thus be
> > expected to be reasonably trouble-free after a brief accomodation
> > period. Phonology would not be a major blockage.
> ***
> This is like saying that English when read with French prosody and French
> letter values is not a major blockage.
> I consider this to be nonsense.
> A.
> ***

> > Neologisms, new culture and technology, and new idioms would be
> > the major blockage. Sequential verbs might trip-up an Israeli without
> > extensive biblical exposure and practice, and their lack would likewise
> > be a bit confusing to Moshe. But communication would be possible
> > and would get on track after a short while.
> > All we would need would be a time/dimension machine with a situation
> > like Moshe, Eliyahu and Yeshua conversing together on a mountain
> > somewhere (cf. Matt 17.3).
> >
> > I'll have to side with Uri that communication in a pub would work.
> ***
> I understood this idea as ironic!?
>
> Do you know that story from Chaucer himself that he said eggs or eyes to a
> southern English lady, and she did not understand him, because her plural
> was eyen. Sometimes it does not take much to block communication.
>
> Arnaud Fournet
> ***

Sometimes, but this is the exception. I don't know this story, but since
Chaucer himself was Southern English, I doubt that he found the ambiguity
a serious difficulty.

--
Will Parsons




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page