Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Joel:

Is it possible that a settle aleph bet was not developed until later? Just as 
strict spelling rules weren’t developed until much later, so the order of 
letters 
within an abecedary also were somewhat fluid?

Or is it possible that poets considered an exact following of an aleph bet 
optional? For example, Psalm 119 has the modern order, but Psalm 145 skips 
the nun.

Karl W. Randoph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" <joel AT exc.com>
> 
> > thanks George. I was hoping it might explain why Lamentations chapters 
> > 2,3,4
> > have the same order: Samek Pe Ayin.
> 
> The Izbet Sartah abecedary, the oldest surviving example of written
> Hebrew, contains as-yet deciphered text, and beneath that the aleph
> bet, written from left to right.  But the aleph bet, like Lamentations
> 2-4, puts Pe before Ayin.  It looks like the ordering of Pe/Ayin was
> not firmly set until later.  (The tablet also reverses Zion/Chet.)
> 
> The Izbet Sartah abecedary is discussed in detail in Volume 4 of the
> 1977 issue of the _Journal of the Tel Aviv University Institute of
> Archaeology_, in two articles.  My latest book (_In the Beginning_
> [NYU Press, 2004]) has a very brief summary.
> 
> -Joel Hoffman
-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm