Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>]

It is usually assumed that the Masoretes intentionally changed the 
vocalization of YHWH on the model of Adonai.

What is the basis of this opinion? Is there any contemporary evidence of such 
assertion?

Reading YHWH with Masoretic pointing yields more or less the same Iaoa as the 
attested ancient pronunciations.

Vadim Cherny
>From kgraham0938 AT comcast.net  Wed Sep 14 07:54:01 2005
Return-Path: <kgraham0938 AT comcast.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net (sccrmhc12.comcast.net [63.240.76.22])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4047B4C005
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 07:54:01 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from 204.127.205.148 ([204.127.205.148])
        by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP
        id <2005091411540001200mtnpte>; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:54:00 +0000
Received: from [69.136.149.33] by 204.127.205.148;
        Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:54:00 +0000
From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:54:00 +0000
Message-Id: 
<091420051154.28729.43280F5800005166000070392200735446C8CCC7CF030E080E9D0905 AT comcast.net>
X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Dec 17 2004)
X-Authenticated-Sender: a2dyYWhhbTA5MzhAY29tY2FzdC5uZXQMIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Masoretic vocalization of the name
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: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 11:54:01 -0000

@ Vadim:

I think that tradition came from the qere as opposed to the ketive of the 
text.  The vowel letters in the divine name were to remind the reader to 
speak adonai, when they came to the divine name.

If you have a BHS, the vowels that surrond the divine name are 
unpronouncible, and are meant to be that way.  Supposedly there are some 
other MSS manuscripts with a holem/vav instead of just a vav, which makes it 
look even more like adonai than even in our BHS.
--
Kelton Graham
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message --------------

> It is usually assumed that the Masoretes intentionally changed the 
> vocalization
> of YHWH on the model of Adonai.
>
> What is the basis of this opinion? Is there any contemporary evidence of 
> such
> assertion?
>
> Reading YHWH with Masoretic pointing yields more or less the same Iaoa as 
> the
> attested ancient pronunciations.
>
> Vadim Cherny
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>From peterkirk AT qaya.org  Wed Sep 14 08:54:33 2005
Return-Path: <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from pan.hu-pan.com (unknown [67.15.6.3])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B0F74C005
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 08:54:33 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from 213-162-124-237.peterk253.adsl.metronet.co.uk
        ([213.162.124.237] helo=[10.0.0.1])
        by pan.hu-pan.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.52)
        id 1EFWmS-0000KI-PP; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 13:54:32 +0100
Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.0.344 [267.10.24]);
        Wed, 14 Sep 2005 13:53:26 +0100
Message-ID: <43281D46.3080601 AT qaya.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 13:53:26 +0100
From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com
References: <20050913194400.HAAX11606.simmts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@duron> 
<e6ea6c00050913153156e5a4c7 AT mail.gmail.com>     <43276A0C.8040301 AT qaya.org>
        <e6ea6c0005091402561224868a AT mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e6ea6c0005091402561224868a AT mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
        please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - pan.hu-pan.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.ibiblio.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - qaya.org
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Cc: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Babylonian pointing
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: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 12:54:33 -0000

On 14/09/2005 10:56, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:

>On 9/14/05, Peter Kirk  wrote:
>
>
>
>>The most convincing of a number of reasons why the different pointing
>>systems need separate Unicode code points is that each combining
>>mark is associated with a particular position relative to the base
>>character, and the system would get very confused if the position of the
>>mark changed with a font change. Also there are texts with both sets of
>>pointing, I understand.
>>
>>
>
>There are also many texts with two fonts.  Just because "Rashi" script
>appears as a script for many commentaries of the Torah and Talmud side
>by side with Hebrew script, and in some cases is used as a method of
>sorts to highlight a phrase (much like small caps would be used to, say,
>denote a keyword in a software language book), so too, there is no
>reason for multiple Rashi and Hebrew scripts.  It is one script with two
>fonts and both fonts can be used in the very same text, even in the very
>same sentence.
>
>

Yes, but you can't mix fonts between different combining marks on the
same base character - if you try, the combining mark becomes separate
from the base character. This is a technical limitation rather than a
Unicode one, nevertheless it is a very real limitation which Microsoft
etc are unlikely ever to overcome. So you can't point the same words
with both systems with a font switch.

>...
>What I think leads to the conclusion that they should be separate is
>that the vowel marks are really different.  It's not just a different version
>of "patah".  It's a different vowel that overlaps some of the Tiberian
>patah and does not overlap others.  So it really is a very distinct
>symbol.  And having concluded that, it becomes reasonable to suppose
>that at least other vowel markings, but probably also cantillation marks,
>(even though the cantillation marks might be considered just a subset
>of the Tiberian one) should be considered as a separate group in their
>entirety.
>
>

I agree with your conclusion.

--
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: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.24/101 - Release Date: 13/09/2005