Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Yitzhak,

You have understood my arguments correctly. Moreover, the vowels "a" and "e" 
can be more open or more closed, to the point where the sounds can resemble 
one another.  The Babylonian scribes would naturally choose  the syllable 
with the vowel they would use to pronounce the Jewish names, and this may 
have been more open or more closed that the vowel used by the Jews.
Please also remember Zadok`s words about the shift from "a" to "o," which 
probably had not yet occurred. So there are many uncertain factors in the 
Babylonian writing.


Best regards

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
To: "Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] yhwh pronunciation


Dear Rolf,

You wrote earlier, "Even if the first vowel is an "a" sound, that does not
necessarily argue in favor of a patah as the first vowel of YHWH,  For 
example,
the names Gedalyahu and Gemaryahu both has the sign representing GA as
their first syllable, and these names have no theophoric elements at the
beginning."  I interpret this to mean, "Even if the first vowel [of
the Babylonian
transcription of initial theophoric element Yahwistic names] is an 'a' 
sound,
[and we assume that Yahwistic names use a pronounciation close to the
pronounciation of yhwh], that does not necessarily argue in favor of a patah 
as
the first vowel of yhwh, [because] the names Gedalyahu and Gemaryahu both
[have] the sign representing GA as their first syllable, [and yet their MT
pronounciation has a schwa] and these names have no theophoric elements
at the beginning [that might otherwise cause the Massoretes to change the
pronounciation for fear of profaning the sacred.]"  That's quite a lot of
brackets, and otherwise I can't figure out the paragraph.  Is this a proper
restatement of what you meant?

Yitzhak Sapir