sin -> samekh in OT/HB

Ian Hutchesson mc2499 at mclink.it
Thu Mar 1 21:18:15 EST 2001


>

Thanks Peter for your efforts here. I had the idea from Kutscher that it was
a more localized phenomenon, so I started thinking it might be useful for
relating 1QIsaA to a range of OT/HB texts, but this doesn't seem to be the
case.

I'm now wondering why this alternation manifests itself. Is it a hint that
there was some other dialectic form of Hebrew in parallel to the "high"
form? Is it more simply the possibility that the two sounds had coalesced
into one and the tradition maintained the old written forms? Or is it even
influence from outside, from another language? Or something else again?


Ian

>Here are some examples of sin/samekh alternation (found in BDB, in all
cases
>the alternation is in the first root letter because that was easy to
find!):
>
>&:DIRFH (Kings, Chronicles) from root SDR (Job)





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list