Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Trevor & Julie Peterson" <06peterson AT cua.edu>]

[snipped]

> were all human written
> languages devoid of vowles in early times, or only Semetic ones?

Actually, not all Semitic writing lacked representation of vowels.  The
earliest writing system known to man (cuneiform) was used by
Semitic-speakers throughout the ancient Near East.  The Akkadian dialects
(Old Babylonian, Old Assyrian, etc.) are a prominent example.  The system is
logo-syllabic, meaning that, while some signs represent whole words or
ideas, all signs have at least a syllabic value, vowel-consonant, vowel,
consonant-vowel, or consonant-vowel consonant.  Needless to say, the system
is quite complex, but it does indicate vowels, to be sure.  Granted, some
signs can represent a given consonant combined with more than one vowel, but
generally the vowel can be ascertained (albeit with quite a few headaches,
at least in my experience).

> If so,
> when did vowels begin to be written in the texts?  If not, then why only
> Semetic? Why did the ancients feel free to leave out these vowels, when
> moderns (except Semetic peoples of course) feel the need to include them?

Writing seems to have originated not so much as an exact representation of
speech, but as a shorthand mnemonic device.  Over the millennia, we've grown
accustomed to writing as a medium in its own right and learned to appreciate
the benefits of writing that leaves less responsibility to the interpreter
(at least apparently so), but even our writing doesn't give everything one
needs to reconstruct the speech exactly.  Just think of what it would be
like to try to reconstruct English speech from written records only.  There
is a lot of inconsistency in how letters are pronounced, but as native
speakers we can easily fill in the gaps.  That's not a complete answer, but
I don't know that it's possible to answer everything you're asking.

Trevor Peterson
CUA/Semitics