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: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Vadim Cherny <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation
  • Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 18:35:33 +0100

On 02/08/2005 17:53, Vadim Cherny wrote:

In the verb hypothesis, some transliteration of he would be expected, and
the word could resemble Ieue, albeit remotely.
In my hypothesis of 1-2-3ms suffixes, I could imagine Iaoe, but not Ieue,
unless in rapid pronunciation.


I wonder if you would accept Iaoue as sufficiently close to your "Ieue".
After all, upsilon on its own is improbable as Greek routinely used the
omicron-upsilon diphthong for the sound "w". And don't forget that
Clement's form was (probably) Iaoue.


I think, Iaoue is very clearly matres lectionis YHW + ue for h.


This is nonsense. UE NEVER represents he. And UE is not a unit in Greek.
If you divided it up as I-A-OU-E representing Y-H-W-H, you might be on
to something, although I don't think this is right either.

Theodoret's Iabe is a variant of
Iaoue from a time or dialect when the "w" sound had changed to "v",
which by then was the pronunciation of Greek beta.


I think of Iabe as literal, not phonetic transliteration. Letters, not
sounds transliterated. Letter-for-letter, YHWH for I(H-A)(W-B)(final H-E).


Do you have any evidence for this being not phonetic except that it
doesn't give the result you want?

So, Clement's and Theodoret's evidence supports "the verb hypothesis".


ihie (verb of YHWH) to ieue, and ieue to Iaoue are two very far-fetched
suppositions, making the ihie-Iaoue tranformations highly improbable, in my
opinion.


These are indeed far-fetched, but they are not my suppositions. My
theory is a verb form Yahwe(h), a regular formation (either qal or
hiphil) from root HWH, which was transliterated into Greek IAOUE
according to the regular Greek transliteration rules. Well, it is hardly
my theory, for it was that of Gesenius in the 19th century. And in all
of the long discussion here I have seen nothing to indicate that the
great Gesenius got it wrong.

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






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page