Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Peter Kirk" <Peter_Kirk AT sil.org>]

This good point (re Elohim - not Abram/Abraham, concerning which I have no
comment) requires further clarification (partly, but not fully, given in
previous postings). The "apparent feminine ending" of 'eloah is not apparent
at all to Hebrew readers, but only to those who look only at the English
spelling.

In the common feminine ending of Hebrew nouns, qamets + he, the he is
silent. It was originally a mater lectionis indicating a final non-high
vowel (a, e or o). (The same is true of the he ending in "lamed-he" verbs.)
The feminine ending is usually transcribed -ah in English, which comes out
correctly as a final h is always silent in English. But this is misleading,
and it is important to avoid writing this final h in languages in which
final h is pronounced. In my opinion it would be better to drop this final h
in English transcriptions as well. But one reason for keeping it for
Biblical names is to preserve the distinction from names ending in ayin and
aleph.

In Hebrew there are a number of words (but very few names) which do have a
pronounced final h sound. These are always indicated by mappiq (a dot like
dagesh) in the letter he. He with mappiq follows the same rule as final ayin
and heth: if the preceding vowel is not open (qamets or pathah) a "furtive"
pathah is placed under the he with mappiq, but is pronounced before the he.
Now 'eloah seems to be an example of this - though oddly it is spelled
without mappiq in Deut 32:15,17 and 2 Chr. 32:15, in BHS and L but not in
other MSS and editions. So you will find that the spelling of 'eloah in Job
3:4 for example, in CCAT format, is ):ELOWH.A , so quite different from the
feminine ending which is always -FH . The common form ):ELOHIYM is the
regular plural of ):ELOWH.A except that the mater W has been dropped; the
furtive pathah and the mappiq are always dropped before suffixes.

Thus 'eloah and 'elohim seem to be derived from a root )-L-H, with the he
being a real he as in the root G-B-H, not the silent he which is really a
yod found in most traditionally named "lamed-he" roots. This is a good
argument against 'elohim being derived from the root )-L-H "swear, curse"
(or "wail", or "be corrupt") as this root is really )-L-Y.

The Arabic "Allah" should properly have a pronounced final h. Listen to how
it is pronounced by Middle Easterners. This clearly indicates that it is
cognate with 'eloah.

Peter Kirk


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin L. Barney [mailto:klbarney AT yahoo.com]
Sent: 21 November 2000 23:09
To: Biblical Hebrew
Subject: Re: exegesis per ELOHIM as a female noun:


I think several listers have correctly observed that this question had its
origin in an incorrect assumption that the -ah ending of 'eloah is
necessarily a marker of feminine gender.  I just thought I would add some
info as to the derivation of that he'.  You start with 'el (Akk. 'ilu),
the plural of which is 'elim.  I believe 'elohim is an expanded form of
'elim, reflecting a mediate he' based on Aramaic influence (this point is
made in TDOT).  A very similar phenomenon can be seen in the names Abram
and Abraham (the latter Aramaized with a mediate he' also).  'Eloah is
then a late singular, derived backwards from the plural 'elohim.

If this derivation is correct, then the apparent feminine ending on 'eloah
is purely an accident of the Aramaizing he'.  The word is masculine.

Kevin L. Barney
Hoffman Estates, Illinois
klbarney AT yahoo.com

---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [Peter_Kirk AT sil.org]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.