Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>]

Excellent research!
This would show that the Torah was in its canonical form when Solomon built 
the temple.


-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Dave Washburn
Sent: Tue 8/2/2005 4:09 PM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] Josiah's book of the Law
 
The recent discussion that included Josiah and the discovery during his day 
triggered a memory of something I read a long time ago, and I want to toss it 
out for discussion if nobody minds.

Merrill F. Unger, in his book "Archaeology and the Old Testament" (Grand 
Rapids: Zondervan, 1954) p. 281 says in part that "it was customary in 
ancient times to place documents in the foundations of buildings as is done 
even to the present day [1954, at least]."  He suggests that the Book of the 
Law that Josiah's priests discovered had been placed in the cornerstone of 
the Temple by Solomon, and that during the extensive repairs to the Temple 
that Josiah directed, the stone masons and carpenters came across this 
deposit and reported it to the priests.  Hence the rediscovery of the Book of 
the Law.  Unger also notes that Nabonidus, around the 6th century BC (BCE if 
you prefer) liked to dig into foundations of buildings to see what sorts of 
documents were cached away therein.

I'm wondering what folks here think of this idea as an explanation of the 
discovery during Josiah's reign.

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"Well, if I'd wanted a safe life, I guess I wouldn't have 
married a man who studies rocks." - Betty Armstrong (Fay Masterson)
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From VadimCherny AT mail.ru  Tue Aug  2 12:27:55 2005
Return-Path: <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mx2.mail.ru (mx2.mail.ru [194.67.23.122])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA3444C008
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Tue,  2 Aug 2005 12:27:54 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from [80.90.225.150] (port202 helo=vadim)
        by mx2.mail.ru with asmtp
        id 1DzzcL-0009DT-00; Tue, 02 Aug 2005 20:27:49 +0400
Message-ID: <050401c5977f$601f6c40$0100a8c0@vadim>
From: "Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
To: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
References: 
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F813A422 AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 19:29:36 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1506
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 16:27:55 -0000

RE: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation> The rules for hebrew syllable structure, 
to the best of my knowledge, are quite
set in stone. We have CV  CVC

well, there are all kinds; cvcc


> but I have never seen VVV

you have; YHW
But serioously, YHW is not a word, but a compound. Like an acronym, it 
doesn't conform to morphological rules.

> Plus do you think you could go through the Egyptian/Clementine evidence 
> again but
this time much slower and give links to the passages so that readers can 
verify your
proofs? It would make reading and accepting your arguments much easier.

Iao is commonly cited as an Egyptian for ass. True or not, I can't judge. 
Since our knowledge of Egyptian vowels is sparse to none, I wonder about that 
word, but it is so cited often.

Clement cited Iao variants. Someone gave references in a recent post; they 
are fairly well-known, and you can check in many online libraries. Diodorus 
was cited by Feldman in Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World.

> The IW (iota-omega) prefix we see in the LXX is quite clearly a 
> transliteration of
the shortened divine name YHW with pronuniciation Y:HoW. 

*If* YHWH is a verb, then he is relatively well heard even today, and should 
have been heard still stronger in antiquity. True, Greeks generally omit he, 
but, as I wrote to Peter, that happens in the words that have other 
consonants. In yhwh verb, he is the only candidate for consonantal 
pronunciation, and Greeks would have written it somehow, with epsilon, 
perhaps, but possibly even with gamma.
On the other hand, *if* YHW is a set of matres lectionis, then Io and Iao 
transliterations are natural.

> How do you account for the Masoretic pointing.

They deliberately mis-pointed the name, to keep it from being pronounced in 
vain. To think that they correctly vowelized the name is ridiculous. To do 
so, would have opened the name to multitude of empty pronunciations in daily 
prayers, etc.

> Another thing you should maybe take on board is that nobody said no to 
> pronounce a verb,
they only abolished the use of the verb as a name. It's more modern 
etymological child verb
HYH is among the most common verbs of the bible.

hih is not "more modern." It's Hebrew, as opposed to Aramaic hwh.
*If* YHWH is a verb, then it is ludicrous to imagine--as is clearly stated 
elsewhere--that only the high priest knew it.

Vadim Cherny



RE: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation> Ok!Now I'm finally starting to understand 
you. You think IAO represents the suffixes I.You.He
which we find at the end of verbs.

nouns, too

> Your reason for this is that you feel that the IAO transliteration is more 
> valid than the others, although, I'm still not sure why.

Because it is the only attested ancient pronunciation. Clement's are 
straighforward derivations from Iao.
Other arguments include: the Egyptian word Iao with related meaning, and 
impossibility of declaring a well-known hwh verb a great secret.

> Also, do you think you could humour me and say you/yours instead of 
> thee/thine?

To avoid confusing 2nd and 3rd person.

> On to the theophoric componenents and the shortened name Yah. I still 
> haven't entirely
understood how you would relate these to your suffix theory.

Assuming that Iao stands for 1-2-3s suffixes, imagine these transformations:

3ms suffix hu (later became au, then o) could be written as he rather than 
waw. This transforms Y-H-W into Y-H-H, or YH with mappiq. Thus the form YH or 
YaH.
Writing 3ms suffix as hu instead of waw, YH becomes YHu or YHo.

> Also, how does your theory entwine with Yah's revelation of his name to 
> Moshe?

Let's keep this to linquistic issues.

> And what vowels would you have us put in YHWH to make your theoretical form 
> pronounceable?

We started from that: Iao. No vowels. YHW consist of all matres lectionis; in 
a sense, monument to the linguistic breakthrough, invention of matres 
lectionis.

> Do you agree that the theophoric components were pronounced 
> Yaho/Yahu/Y:ho/Y:hu?

No. Iota-omega. He was not pronounced precisely because it is mater 
lectionis, and its "a" sound was assimilated into omega.

> Can you cite any other examples of a 'he' maters lectionis midword?

YHW is not a morphologically normal word.

Vadim Cherny


RE: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciationStart with possessive suffixes: i, a, u. For 
this or that reason, not essential here, supportive consonants were 
introduced: i, ca (ta), hu.. Suffix consonants lack semantical importance. 
Also note that 3ms hu-au-o, giving rise to yhu-yho-yao variants.

There is a noun "an," essence. Ani (or, with non-essential suffix consonant, 
anoci) is "my essence," abstracized as I. Ata is anta, "thine essence" that 
became "thou." Anacnu is similarly "our essence." Different etymologies were 
proposed for hu, but for our case only u is important, 3s possessive suffix, 
making hu some word emasculated into he and 3s possessive suffix u.

Iao would be literally "my, thine, his" (i-a-u, or later i-a-o), but I 
speculate that Iao stands more generally for "I, thou, he" epitomized by the 
possessive suffixes.

Vadim Cherny

> To the best of my knowledge I,You,He would be:

)aNoCHiY)THuW)
and I really struggle to see how you turn that into a IAO transliteration.

RE: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation> I am interested to know how you come about 
such a radical
theory. You must have more reason than a philosophical idea of a society.

Well, only "I, thou, he" could be pronounced Iao.. The verb cannot.
Plural suffixes are construed similarly. Duality ai (later - plural e-ei-im) 
means "thou, I". Abstract plural -o (-ot) is -au, "thou, he." This makes 
sense: using 1s, the most personal relation, for duality, and 3ms, the 
remotest, for abstract plurality.
Suffixes are vowels only. Consonants are semantical devices, vowels - 
morphological. Suffix consonants change between nouns and verbs, but vowels 
persist. Suffix consonants (caf 2s nouns, tav 2s verbs) served perhaps to 
write down suffixes without matres lectionis, or perhaps to avoid post-tonic 
gemination in penultimates-stressed nouns. This is a separate topic.
YHWH cannot be a meaningful word, like the verb, since no one could possibly 
declare a well-attested verb a great secret with unknown pronunciation.

> How would you account for the forms YaH, YaHu/YaHo with your model?

he could be mater lectionis for 2ms suffix -a. Incidentally, he is also 
"supportive consonant" of 3ms -hu-au-o. Thus, yau=yhh=yh with mappiq.
yhu=yau with mater lectionis
yho=yao=yau with 3ms hu-o

> How would you account for the transliterations IABE, IAOUAI etc.?

Iabe is literal, not phonetic transliteration; waw-beta.
Iaouai is plural form of Iao, modeled upon plural Elokim..

> Are there any patterns ANE cultures that led you to this hypothesis?

Of course, Judaism is unique.

> Is there any internal evidence in the TaNaKH which supports your theory?

Depending on how you read it. Milgrom's interpretation, I believe, is 
supportive.

Vadim Cherny

  This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
  Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.



  This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
  Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.



  This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
  Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.



  This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
  Security System.