Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: Transliteration Schemes

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Trevor Peterson <06PETERSON AT cua.edu>
  • To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Transliteration Schemes
  • Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 13:33:52 -0500


>===== Original Message From c stirling bartholomew
<cc.constantine AT worldnet.att.net> =====
>Are there really Semitic language specialists who cannot read biblical
>Hebrew script? Do these people really exists or is this just a myth
>propagated by publishers who just don't want to bother with the typesetting
>problems?

Dunno. I can't recall ever meeting one, but I can conceive of a person
knowing
how to work with the language from a comparative standpoint but not knowing
the script. One issue could be the effort involved in retaining the script. I
studied Ethiopic a year ago, but I probably wouldn't be able to read the
script perfectly without a little bit of refresher (and we actually bothered
to learn it--Lambdin's grammar works entirely in transliteration). I simply
haven't had much occasion to read Ethiopic, and because the system is
syllabic, it doesn't stick quite as well as an alphabetic system. The same
can
be said about Akkadian. I'm also probably a little bit rusty with some of the
Syriac scripts. I've tried to keep reading it from time to time, but what I
happen to have handy is in the Western script only. My point, then, is that I
can see from my own experience how a person who doesn't work much with Hebrew
but has studied the basic features of the language and refers to it primarily
for comparative evidence might not know the script, or at least not know it
well. Somewhat less hypothetically, I think it's reasonable to allow a common
Semitic transcription system as a useful tool for those who deal in some
fashion with all of the Semitic languages at one point or another but
specialize in one or two. On the other hand, it doesn't seem like a person
could get very far in complete ignorance of the scripts. It's well and good
that HALOT transcribes Arabic, but I should still be able to look up the word
in an Arabic dictionary.

It may interest some people to know that M. Sokoloff identified as an
improvement in his dictionary of Babylonian Jewish Aramaic over the
Palestinian that newer publishing conventions allowed it to be printed with
Syriac fonts, instead of transliterating Syriac references.
>
>When I read in the front matter of some reference book the standard boiler
>plate about transliterating Hebrew and Greek for the "non-specialist" I
>always ask, show me someone who cannot read the script and I will show you
>that they cannot read the transliteration.

The fact remains, though, that non-specialists think they can use such
reference books productively, and a reference book successfully marketed to
them will sell more copies.

Trevor Peterson
CUA/Semitics





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page