Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] linguistics, was Re: Prov. 30:19

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
  • To: "Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] linguistics, was Re: Prov. 30:19
  • Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 10:32:22 -0500

Dear Jason:

I’m using the definitions I got from anthropology classes.

A “phone” is a simple sound without meaning per se.

A “phoneme” is a sound with meaning.

For example, in Hong Kong, if I were to say “lei5” or “ney5”, both words have
the same meaning, “you”. The ‘l’ and ‘n’ are different phones, but make up
one phoneme in this context. On the other hand, if I were to say “lay” and
“nay” (similar pronunciations) in English, the ‘l’ and ‘n’ are not only
phones, but also phonemes because they change the meaning.

A grapheme may correspond to a phone, phoneme or be completely independent.
In Chinese ideograms and Egyptian hieroglyphs, they are independent of
pronunciation, in English they are only partially connected, but in most
historical alphabetic systems, a grapheme corresponded to a phone or a
phoneme, hence they are called phonetic writing systems. (As for the early
Scandinavian runic writing, did the early Vikings have only 16 phones in
their speech, or did their 16 glyphs correspond to 16 phonemes? Only an
interview with a surviving Viking can answer that.)

It is my belief that Hebrew started out as a phonetic writing system, where
each grapheme corresponded to a consonantal phone with a couple of exceptions
where waw and yod sometimes indicated vowels, only later, as the language
changed, added new phones and split one phoneme into two, were the graphemes
adjusted by adding dots to show the new phonetic values. We see the same
development in Arabic.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Hare" <jason AT hareplay.com>

> All,
>
> I am going to sound a bit basic, but I have seen many people using the word
> "phoneme" to refer to the letters of the alphabet. So far as I know, and I
> have only just begun my study into linguistics, "grapheme" would be more
> appropriate when discussing the written form the language (the alphabet).
> The Hebrew alefbet is composed of twenty-two "graphemes," but many more
> "phonemes." Each variant of the BGDKP"T family would be a different phoneme.
> Sin and shin are different phonemes, but one grapheme. Is not a "phoneme"
> the same as an "allophone"?
><snip>
> Todah rabah,
> Jason
--
__________________________________________________________
Sign-up for your own personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

CareerBuilder.com has over 400,000 jobs. Be smarter about your job search
http://corp.mail.com/careers





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page