Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] yhwh pronunciation

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>
  • To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] yhwh pronunciation
  • Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:28:55 +0100

Dear Peter,

See my comments below.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
To: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] yhwh pronunciation


On 20/07/2005 11:41, Read, James C wrote:

...

Sorry for the mess up before. That's what happens when you join a
discussion from memory without checking the grammar first.
However, while you are quite right that a regular verb would be
bisyllabic I'm sure you are all aware that regular roots are few
and far between. And that the root hwh is anything but regular.
Plus the general conception that this is a causative form. To the
best of my knowledge pe guttural hiphils and hophals are trisyllabic.
The evidence from the ancient names of a second long vowel o/u is
insurmountable.



We have discussed this on the list before, and I think we have come to
the conclusion that for the root HWH, according to the normal rules for
weak verbs, both the Qal 3rd person "imperfect" and the Hiphil 3rd
person "imperfect" would most probably have the form YAHWEH, i.e.
identical to the reconstructed form of the divine name. The Qal might
also be YIHWEH as the "imperfect" of roots with initial he is somewhat
variable, cf. YIHYEH from HYH.

I do not know who the "we" are that you mention in your second clause. But the word cannot include all the members of the list. I see no reason why YHWH should not be a verb, but at the same time, I see no reason why it should be. The following reasons speak against your Yahweh interpretation.

1) The verb HWH is Aramaic and occurs only four times in the Hebrew text of the Tanakh.
2) The word-play in Exodus 3:14,15 is between HYH and YHWH. If YHWH comes from the verb HWH why not use this form in the word-play?
3) There is no Hiphil form of the static verbs HYH or HWH.
4) If YHWH comes from HWH, and this is a name that God is supposed to have given himself, why is the third person singluar and not the first person used, as in the case of Ehye?
5) If the name is Hiphil, 3rd person singular, YIQTOL the form would be YAHWE, as you say. But the only evidence we have (as shown in my previous post) is that the name had three syllables, and that the first two were YEHO.


Note that these forms are both bisyllabic. There is no reason to expect
a trisyllabic form here, except that the he might take a very short
hataf vowel e.g. YAHWEH might become YAHaWEH with the small a indicating
a very short hataf patah. But there is no way that a long o vowel would
be found in this position.

Because we do not know the correct pronunciation of YHWH, I do not exclude the pronunciation Yahweh. But I must again say that there is no Hebrew or Aramic evidence in favor of this pronunciation. There is some evidence, however, namely the thophoric names beginning with YEHO. We have no clues as to the vowel of the third syllable, but this evidence suggests shewa and holem as the first two vowels.

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

Best regards

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page