Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Proto-Semitic, was WAYYIQTOL

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Proto-Semitic, was WAYYIQTOL
  • Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 03:33:02 -0800

On 17/03/2004 18:19, Dave Washburn wrote:

On Wednesday 17 March 2004 03:35, Peter Kirk wrote:

...

We know quite a lot about how Hebrew was pronounced at various times
from transliterations of names in the Septuagint, in the New Testament,
in Origen's Hexapla, in the Vulgate, etc etc. If you want to go back to
the pre-exilic period, we know some things from cuneiform and Egyptian
hieroglyphic transcriptions of names, although there may be some doubt
about their original pronunciation.


This may digress a bit, but I think it also might apply to the discussion, but as I recall, the Erasmian pronunciation that has been in use for New Testament Greek was based on the same sort of extrapolation, especially pronunciation of names that carried over into Latin. But the current wisdom tends to downgrade the value of Erasmus' system and declare those proper-name pronunciation extrapolations suspect at best. I wonder if the same is being said, or could be applied, to pronunciation of Hebrew using names in the LXX and elsewhere? Note that I'm not saying I agree with the critics of the Erasmian system, I'm just pointing out that some have called this method into question.


I'm sure this has been done, but I am not aware of the details. I suspect that one of the main pieces of evidence against Erasmus' system is the regular LXX transliteration of Hebrew pe, tav and kaf (whether or not with dagesh) as Greek phi, theta and chi rather than pi, tau and kappa. It is highly unlikely that the Hebrew letters were always pronounced as fricatives; it is much more likely that the Greek letters were at that time pronounced as aspirated plosives. Latin transcriptions of Greek also give evidence for that, in that Greek phi became ph, not f, in Latin (and still in English though not in many European languages).

Of course this illustrates the complexity of the whole issue, and shows that it cannot be addressed adequately by looking at the evidence from just one language in isolation.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page