Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Kevin Barney <klbarney AT yahoo.com>]

What is the etymology of the word tallit?  I have seen
the suggestion on the internet that it means "little
tent," but I would like to verify whether that is
correct.  As I understand it, the word is not attested
in BH and derives from Mishnaic Hebrew.

Further, is there any linguistic relationship between
the tallit and the talitha in talitha cumi?  I
understand that talitha is the feminine form of
Aramaic talya, "lamb, youth."  Is the similarity of
appearance just accidental?

Thanks in advance for responses.

Kevin Barney
Hoffman Estate, Illinois
klbarney AT yahoo.com

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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>From lizfried AT umich.edu  Sun Feb  9 19:01:14 2003
Return-Path: <lizfried AT umich.edu>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from harumscarum.mr.itd.umich.edu (harumscarum.mr.itd.umich.edu
        [141.211.125.17])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B202B2001C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Sun,  9 Feb 2003 19:01:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lizfried (pcp02370745pcs.sanarb01.mi.comcast.net
        [68.43.236.53])
        by harumscarum.mr.itd.umich.edu (8.9.3/3.3s) with SMTP id TAA04941
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:02:17 -0500 (EST)
From: "Lisbeth S. Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] LORD
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:06:35 -0500
Message-ID: <NFBBKDEKJBKDMCGCFJNKIEMHELAA.lizfried AT umich.edu>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
In-reply-to: <a05111b04ba6c687624db@[80.213.41.44]>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Importance: Normal
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: lizfried AT umich.edu
List-Id: A forum on the Hebrew Bible, its language and interpretation
 <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman-2.1/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman-2.1/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 00:01:14 -0000

Dear Rolf,
Fascinating,
Thanks!
Liz

> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org]On Behalf Of
> furuli AT online.no
> Sent: Sun, February 09, 2003 4:13 PM
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] LORD
>
>
> Dear Liz,
>
> A couple of years ago E. Tov visited Oslo and gave a series of
> lectures. A principal theme in these was that many, or even most of
> the Qumran manuscripts were made by different people in different
> places outside Qumran, and then they were imported to Qumran.
>
> "The Rule of the Community"  VI,27-VII,2 seems to indicate that a
> substitute was used for the name by the Qumran community.  Evidence
> for this is seen in non-biblical manuscripts which use )L where we
> expect the tetragrammaton. There are, however, many non-biblical
> manuscripts that use YHWH, which may suggest that they were written
> by people in other localities who used the name. The witness of the
> biblical manuscripts you mention, is harder to interpret. One could
> argue that because these manuscripts were copies and the
> tetragrammaton was in their Vorlage, it was copied. Even if it
> occurred in the manuscript they could use a substitute when they read
> the text. Or, if biblical manuscripts were copied outside Qumran, the
> tetragrammaton may have been pronounced by the people in these
> localities.
>
> The occurrence of the tetragrammaton in a manuscript, therefore,
> cannot settle the question whether it was pronounced or not. However,
> the occurrence of IAW in 4QLXXLevb suggests pronunciation because it
> is a phonetic transcription.
>
> One important fact regarding the DSS is for the most part neglected
> in discussions about the name, namely, that the substitute used in
> Qumran manuscripts is *not* )DNWNY but )L. Thus the KURIOS of NT and
> LXX manuscripts of the 2nd century C.E. have no antecedent!  The
> argument is that at the beginning of C.E. the name was no longer
> pronounced, but was substituted by )DNWNY. Because of this the LXX
> translators and the NT writers translated  )DNWNY with KURIOS. And
> that is the reason why KURIOS with reference to God is found both
> places. But the problem is the the most important link, the first one
> is lacking. There is no indication that )DNWNY  (or Aramaic MR)/MRY)
> was used as a substitute for YHWH in B.C.E.!  And there is no
> evidence that i generally was substituted in the days of Jesus. Thus
> the pointing of YHWH by the Masoretes cannot be traced back longer
> than to the days of Jehuda hannasi and Mishnaic times.
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Rolf Furuli
> University of Oslo
>
>
>
> >Dear Rolf,
> >What troubles me about your excellent discussion
> >is that YHWH is used in the DSS copies
> >of the biblical texts.
> >Liz
> >
> >
> >  >
> >>  Dear Bill,
> >>
> >>  If we look at the question from a historical point of view, it was
> >>  not a particular interpretation of Scripture that caused people to
> >>  stop pronouncing YHWH, but rather foreign influence. In
> the centuries
> >>  after Alexander the Great, the Jews were in many ways
> influenced by
> >>  Greek thoughts, including Plato's view that God is nameless. "A
> >>  bitter struggle between Hellenists and Hasidim centered around the
> >>  pronunciation of the Divine Name." according to rabbi A.
> Marmorstein
> >  > (1927) "The Old Rabbinic Doctrine of God", p 13. The
> people at Qumran
> >  > ceased pronouncing the name while the Pharisees,
> Haemerobaptistae and
> >  > others continued to pronounce the name.
> >>
> >>  There are three passages in the Tanach that has something
> to do with
> >>  the use of the name, namely,  Lev 24.16, Ex 3.15 and 20:7.
> >>  Manuscripts of the LXX from the second century C.E. translate Lev
> >>  24:16 in a way suggesting that the name should not be
> used (we do not
> >>  know the original wording); Targum Onkelos does about the same.
> >>  However, the rabbis of old did *not* use Lev 24:16 or Ex 20:7 as
> >>  reason for not pronouncing the name, according to G. F.
> Moore (1955)
> >>  "Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era. the
> Age of the
> >>  Tannaim Judaism", vol I, p. 428.
> >>
> >>  It is quite strange that the very passage that definitely
> says that
> >>  the name should always be used, is the passage that was
> used to show
> >>  that the name should not be pronounced, namely, Ex 3:15. For those
> >>  interested in the four fanciful ways the words of this verse were
> >>  explained to say the opposite of what they do say, please
> look at the
> >  > Jewish lexicon M. M. Kasher (1967) "The Encyclopedia of Biblical
> >  > Interpretation", vol II, p. 109.
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Best regards
> >  >
> >  > Rolf Furuli
> >  > University of Oslo
> >  >
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew