Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Vav Nun Suffix - ONE MORE DAY

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: jimstinehart AT aol.com
  • To: George.Athas AT moore.edu.au, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Vav Nun Suffix - ONE MORE DAY
  • Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 17:48:36 -0500



George Athas:

1. You wrote: “Updating of the text at a later time to reflect later
phonology.”

That is to say, the names of two of Jacob’s sons were originally spelled $M(N
and ZBLN, but centuries later, a 1st millennium BCE editor put a vav in those
two names, to reflect how those two names had come to be pronounced.

But on that theory of the case, why are 40% of the personal names in the
Bible that have a vav nun suffix in the Patriarchal narratives?

2. You wrote: “The waw is a vestige of an old diphthong which eventually
evolved into a pure vowel in a later stage of the language.”

What diphthong would that be? Hebrew diphthongs are usually vowel clusters.
But early Biblical Hebrew did not record vowels.

The “diphthong” is likely -we-, that is, consonantal vav, with a following
vowel that was needed for pronunciation. I see the vav in a vav nun suffix
in the oldest parts of the Bible as having started out being a true
consonant, but then, over the centuries, that consonantal vav softened in
Hebrew to a vowel. In my opinion, the reason why that happened is that once
the Hurrians disappeared from Canaan, the old Hurrian genitive case marker
vav became inexplicable and totally archaic. By sharp contrast, the -N
portion of -WN still made good sense in west Semitic, so -WN was
re-interpreted to mean -N. Only at that point did the formerly consonantal
vav get downgraded into being a vowel.

3. You wrote: “The ון- diminutive suffix is common enough in Hebrew as a
native feature that there’s really no need for recourse to another language
to explain it. It really
is no big deal.”

It’s true that -WN is a diminutive suffix in modern Israeli Hebrew, but I am
not aware of such a phenomenon in Biblical Hebrew. Even if -WN were a
diminutive suffix, that would not explain why there is such a concentration
of vav nun suffixes in common words and personal names in the Patriarchal
narratives.

4. Yigal Levin wrote: “Yes, what he said...”

You gentlemen seem to be confirming what I suspected. On an all-west Semitic
basis, there seems to be no credible explanation out there as to why 40% of
the common words and personal names in the Bible with a vav nun suffix are
found in the oldest part of the Bible -- the Patriarchal narratives. On the
other hand, if this were due to Hurrian influence, as I have surmised, then
it would make perfect sense to see this concentration of vav nun suffixes in
common words and personal names in the Patriarchal narratives, which are the
oldest part of the Bible, that date all the way back to when Hurrian
princelings ruled many cities throughout Canaan. And the good part about
that is that then the true antiquity of the composition date of the
Patriarchal narratives would be demonstrated, on a linguistic basis. If we
focus on the interior vavs, we can, in my opinion, date the Patriarchal
narratives.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page