Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Vav Nun Suffix

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: jimstinehart AT aol.com
  • To: fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr, if AT math.bu.edu
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Vav Nun Suffix
  • Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 08:10:31 -0500


Dr. Fournet:

1. You wrote: “For the time being, you have just claimed it was derogatory.
I let you explain why gold statues offered by Mitanni kings to Pharaohs were
shown all around Egypt at that time.”

It was derogatory for Egyptians to call greater Canaan X3RW, referencing
exclusively non-Semitic princeling rulers in Canaan in the mid-14th century
BCE, because over 90% of the human beings in Canaan at the time were
indigenous west Semitic speakers, like the Hebrews. Such name was not
derogatory to non-Semitic Mitanni, but rather was derogatory to the people of
Canaan like the Hebrews.

2. You wrote: “[Y]ou're trying to prove that CBYWN is not Semitic. In all
cases Hurrian did not have emphatics and Zi-pa-ya cannot be rendered in
Hebrew as CBYWN.

ogically it should be tsamekh -b- y- “

Hebrew ssade at the time may have been an emphatic sin. Gelb and Purves
compare Zipaya to Akkadian Sippaya, and Zippe/Zi-ib-be-e to Akkadian Sippe.
It’s hard to tell at this remove whether ssade/C, samekh/S, or sin/% would be
the expected sibilant in early Biblical Hebrew. As against your suggestion
of samekh, in the 25 non-Semitic proper names set forth in the Patriarchal
narratives, not one has a samekh. In my view, all 25 have letter-for-letter
accuracy in the spellings of these non-Semitic names.

3. In response to my statement that “in writing or when speaking, those Nuzi
names would have had added to them a very long string of suffixes, which very
often included, shortly after the basic name, -we-ni- [Biblical -WN], as an
integral part of the long non-Semitic suffix sequence (per pp. 23-24 of your
website)”, you wrote: “This is not an attested word formation in Hurrian.”

Anyone can check out p. 23 of your website and verify what I say. The most
interesting word on that page to people on the b-hebrew list is the
non-Semitic word for “Egypt”:
“KUR [country] Mi-zi- ir- ri- e- wə-ni-eš”. Look at the key suffix element
that comes after the base word for Egypt. It’s -we-ni-. That’s -WN in early
Biblical Hebrew. The best way to represent the incredibly long non-Semitic
suffix sequences by using just two letters in early Biblical Hebrew is
precisely what we see in the received text of the Patriarchal narratives:
-WN. If that doesn’t “sound non-Semitic”, what does?

4. To my assertion that Biblical XTY represents the expected early Biblical
Hebrew defective spelling of the classic, very popular non-Semitic name
XuT-iYa, you wrote: “It should have a -d- not a -t-.”

Per Gelb and Purves at p. 64b regarding this non-Semitic name: “Xu-ti-…,
var. (2) Xu-di-…” Thus either tav/T or dalet/D would work in Biblical Hebrew
here, and Gelb/Purves give T as the first choice.

5. Once one realizes that in 25 out of 25 cases there is apparent
letter-for-letter spelling accuracy of non-Semitic names in the Patriarchal
narratives, one realizes that this text is based on a written record from the
mid-14th century BCE, and then one starts to give a bit of deference to the
spelling choices that the early Hebrew author made. Samekh or ssade, dalet
or tav. Yes, those are legitimate questions for you to raise. But I see the
non-biblical evidence as being essentially neutral as to the two above cases
you raise, and if so, then the Biblical evidence should be decisive.

>From where I sit, you have not undercut the pinpoint historical accuracy of
>a single letter in the 25 non-Semitic names set forth in the Patriarchal
>narratives. The incredible accuracy as to these non-Semitic names from the
>Late Bronze Age confirms both the antiquity, and historical accuracy, of
>this Biblical text. Once people start looking at your website, they will
>gain a whole new appreciation for the antiquity and accuracy of the
>Patriarchal narratives in a mid-14th century BCE historical time period.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page