Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Clay:

Does the -a suffix transliterated into Greek actually mean that the 
transliteration is from Aramaic, or Hebrew? Or could this be a hold over from 
an original Hebrew pronunciation where the letters of the Hebrew alphabet 
actually referred to a consonant-vowel syllable, instead of a single letter 
as we presently use it? If the latter, would not all Hebrew words and names 
end in vowels? And that the furtive patach under the closing he or chet are 
vestages of an original pronunciation that had the vowel following the 
consonant?

I don't have answers to these questions, but I have seen enough of the 
language that makes me ask them.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "C. Stirling Bartholomew" <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>

>
> 
> I assume this means the -a suffix in Aramaic is not functionally
> "equivalent" to the prefixed Hebrew h. This however leaves me a little
> confused as to what to make of the -a suffix. For example, if we encounter a
> determiner + noun in a translated text but we do not know if the original
> was Hebrew or Aramaic, does the presence of the determiner present us with a
> different set of issues with an Aramaic original than it would in Hebrew?
>   
> 
> greetings,
> Clay Bartholomew 
-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm