Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 27/07/2005 14:22, Shai Heijmans wrote:

> Peter,
>
>  
>
> > Thank you, Shai. But are these from pointed texts, or
> > transcriptions in 
> > languages which have vowels, or are the vowels reconstructed 
> > by the editors?
> >    
>
>
> The text of the talmud is on the whole unvocalised; the forms I
> mentioned appear as ryglwy, qwmwy, etc.
> The vowels were added by me (although on basis of the sporadically
> vocalised forms in the Geniza manuscripts); of course, I should have
> mentioned that. Sorry.
>  

Thank you. But I accept that the final -WY strongly suggests -oy or 
possibly -uy.

>  
>
> > ...
> >
> > I continue to hold that Greek -WI is highly unlikely to represent a 
> > final diphthong -oy, but much more probably two separate 
> > syllables -o-i 
> > or perhaps o-ay.
> >
> >    
>
> A triphthong oay! I didn't think of that. This is very interesting.
>  

Well, not strictly a triphthong, but two separate syllables, separated 
by he in the Hebrew (or Aramaic) original. I note that Greek WI 
(omega-iota), unlike OI, cannot be a diphthong, but should be pronounced 
as two separate syllables.

> But if you take ELWI as hebrew, how do you expalin "shebaqtani"?
>
>  
I agree that this is Aramaic. That does not necessarily imply that the 
whole utterance is.

--
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: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.5/58 - Release Date: 25/07/2005