Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 13/02/2005 12:17, Vadim Cherny wrote:

> > ...
>
> What I say, basically, is that the Masoretes recorded some instances of
> begedkefet (with dagesh kal) more plosified than others (without dagesh). ...
>  

OK  if you replace "more plosified" by "not fricativised". In fact the 
raw data says nothing about the direction of change.

> ... Yes, I believe that begedkefet with dagesh kal is more of a plosive than 
> the
> same letter stand-alone. No, I don't assume that stand-alone (say,
> pronounced in alphabet) begedkefet's are pure fricatives. Quite possibly,
> they were aspirated plosives.
>
>  
If you knew anything about phonetics, or had taken any notice of what I 
wrote before, you would know that a non-aspirated plosives is not "more 
of a plosive" than an aspirated plosive, but simply a different kind of 
plosive.

> ...
>
> Right. And if dagesh is a stop, intermission, then it "causes" gemination or
> stronger plosification.
>
>  
I will accept that in principle a "stop" might "cause" gemination or 
inhibit fricativisation. But I don't think that is what is happening 
here. In my opinion and that of most scholars, a dagesh is simply an 
indication of lack of fricativisation, or of gemination, two features 
which occur together with intervocalic begadkepat letters.

> > > This process created begedkefet pairs.
> > >      
> > Actually this is indeed not far from my position, although I would
> > suggest that more of the changes had happened before the  Masoretes.
> >
> >    
> I think otherwise mostly because the Slavonic Bible shows no trace of strong
> plosives still in the 11th century. Considering the tremendous influence the
> Hebrew exerted on Slavic language, Slavonic Bible likely reflected the
> current Aramaic pronunciation. ...
>  

I find this extremely surprising. I understood that the Slavonic Bible 
was based entirely on the Greek with no direct Hebrew or Aramaic 
influence. This certainly seems to be true of names in the Slavonic and 
Russian Bibles. Can you give me any examples of names in the Slavonic 
or  Russian Bible which are based directly on Hebrew not via LXX? (Yes, 
they may have knocked off -os  and -as endings according to standard 
Russian practice with Greek names as well as Hebrew ones: IOUDAS -> Iuda 
is parallel  to SILAS -> Sila.)

> ...
>
> > Did this loss of aspiration actually happen? Are modern Hebrew
> > word-initial pe, tav and kaf aspirated or unaspirated? Maybe it depends
> > on the speakers' former homes.
> >    
>
> Both Sephardic and Ashkenazic phonology universally have the dagesh kal
> letters as strict plosives.
>
>  
An aspirated plosive is a strict plosive. So you have not answered the 
question.

> ...
>
> > in Arabic pe/fe was fricativised in all
> > positions at some time, so was gimel/jim in most dialects.
> >    
>
> The Masoretes and their later interpreters lived in Arabic milieu. The
> dagesh kal cannot be explained by natural phonetic processes of speech, as
> we see in Arabic. ...

Yes, it can. See the very plausible explanations of many scholars. And 
read them properly first before trying to assert your own speculations.

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



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 10/02/2005