[b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation

Read, James C K0434995 at kingston.ac.uk
Tue Aug 2 09:18:49 EDT 2005

The rules for hebrew syllable structure, to the best of my knowledge, are quite
set in stone. We have


but I have never seen


Do you have any other example of it?
Plus do you think you could go through the Egyptian/Clementine evidence again but 
this time much slower and give links to the passages so that readers can verify your
proofs? It would make reading and accepting your arguments much easier.

The IW (iota-omega) prefix we see in the LXX is quite clearly a transliteration of 
the shortened divine name YHW with pronuniciation Y:HoW. The schewa was a near non 
existant sound for the Greeks and I know that from experience, while teaching English 
to the Italians for three years, when I asked them to transliterate what they heard me 
say they always ommitted the schewa because they heard nothing, having a language with 
only pure vowels.Thus the Greeks transliterated IW because they heard the yodh and that 
sounded similar to an iota, they did not hear the schewa and thus did not attempt to 
transliterate it, they heard the 'oW' which just sounded to them like a long vowel with 
no consanant (their language had no 'w' sound, like Spanish, Italian and Russian of today).
While, I cannot conclusively prove my above assertions, they seem to be in great agreement
with the pointing of the Masoretes.
How do you account for the Masoretic pointing.

Another thing you should maybe take on board is that nobody said no to pronounce a verb,
they only abolished the use of the verb as a name. It's more modern etymological child verb 
HYH is among the most common verbs of the bible. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Vadim Cherny [mailto:VadimCherny at mail.ru]
Sent: Tue 8/2/2005 1:41 PM
To: Read, James C
Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation
RE: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation> Ok!Now I'm finally starting to understand you. You think IAO represents the suffixes I.You.He
which we find at the end of verbs.

nouns, too

> Your reason for this is that you feel that the IAO transliteration is more valid than the others, although, I'm still not sure why.

Because it is the only attested ancient pronunciation. Clement's are straighforward derivations from Iao.
Other arguments include: the Egyptian word Iao with related meaning, and impossibility of declaring a well-known hwh verb a great secret.

> Also, do you think you could humour me and say you/yours instead of thee/thine? 

To avoid confusing 2nd and 3rd person.

> On to the theophoric componenents and the shortened name Yah. I still haven't entirely
understood how you would relate these to your suffix theory. 

Assuming that Iao stands for 1-2-3s suffixes, imagine these transformations:

3ms suffix hu (later became au, then o) could be written as he rather than waw. This transforms Y-H-W into Y-H-H, or YH with mappiq. Thus the form YH or YaH.
Writing 3ms suffix as hu instead of waw, YH becomes YHu or YHo.

> Also, how does your theory entwine with Yah's revelation of his name to Moshe?

Let's keep this to linquistic issues.

> And what vowels would you have us put in YHWH to make your theoretical form pronounceable?

We started from that: Iao. No vowels. YHW consist of all matres lectionis; in a sense, monument to the linguistic breakthrough, invention of matres lectionis.

> Do you agree that the theophoric components were pronounced Yaho/Yahu/Y:ho/Y:hu?

No. Iota-omega. He was not pronounced precisely because it is mater lectionis, and its "a" sound was assimilated into omega.

> Can you cite any other examples of a 'he' maters lectionis midword?

YHW is not a morphologically normal word.

Vadim Cherny

RE: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciationStart with possessive suffixes: i, a, u. For this or that reason, not essential here, supportive consonants were introduced: i, ca (ta), hu.. Suffix consonants lack semantical importance. Also note that 3ms hu-au-o, giving rise to yhu-yho-yao variants.

There is a noun "an," essence. Ani (or, with non-essential suffix consonant, anoci) is "my essence," abstracized as I. Ata is anta, "thine essence" that became "thou." Anacnu is similarly "our essence." Different etymologies were proposed for hu, but for our case only u is important, 3s possessive suffix, making hu some word emasculated into he and 3s possessive suffix u.

Iao would be literally "my, thine, his" (i-a-u, or later i-a-o), but I speculate that Iao stands more generally for "I, thou, he" epitomized by the possessive suffixes.

Vadim Cherny

> To the best of my knowledge I,You,He would be:

and I really struggle to see how you turn that into a IAO transliteration.

RE: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation> I am interested to know how you come about such a radical
theory. You must have more reason than a philosophical idea of a society.

Well, only "I, thou, he" could be pronounced Iao.. The verb cannot.
Plural suffixes are construed similarly. Duality ai (later - plural e-ei-im) means "thou, I". Abstract plural -o (-ot) is -au, "thou, he." This makes sense: using 1s, the most personal relation, for duality, and 3ms, the remotest, for abstract plurality.
Suffixes are vowels only. Consonants are semantical devices, vowels - morphological. Suffix consonants change between nouns and verbs, but vowels persist. Suffix consonants (caf 2s nouns, tav 2s verbs) served perhaps to write down suffixes without matres lectionis, or perhaps to avoid post-tonic gemination in penultimates-stressed nouns. This is a separate topic.
YHWH cannot be a meaningful word, like the verb, since no one could possibly declare a well-attested verb a great secret with unknown pronunciation.

> How would you account for the forms YaH, YaHu/YaHo with your model?

he could be mater lectionis for 2ms suffix -a. Incidentally, he is also "supportive consonant" of 3ms -hu-au-o. Thus, yau=yhh=yh with mappiq.
yhu=yau with mater lectionis
yho=yao=yau with 3ms hu-o

> How would you account for the transliterations IABE, IAOUAI etc.?

Iabe is literal, not phonetic transliteration; waw-beta.
Iaouai is plural form of Iao, modeled upon plural Elokim..

> Are there any patterns ANE cultures that led you to this hypothesis?

Of course, Judaism is unique.

> Is there any internal evidence in the TaNaKH which supports your theory?

Depending on how you read it. Milgrom's interpretation, I believe, is supportive.

Vadim Cherny

  This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
  Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.

  This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
  Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.

  This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
  Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list