Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Marjorie:

I noticed the same pattern in the New Testament with 
transliterated Hebrew names.

But then I noticed something else. In the Byzantine 
tradition of MMS there was a slight difference between 
Galilean and Judaean names: some of the Galilean 
names had tau or pi where Judaean names had theta or 
phi. To me it looks as if a dialectal difference. (Was this the 
origin of Peter's Galilean accent?) For example, Nazareth 
was consistently spelled Nazaret in the Byzantine 
tradition.

I think the practice of spirantizing some hard consonants 
started in the south (Egypt) and gradually moved north, so 
Galilee was still not fully transformed at the time the New 
Testament was written. But the LXX, coming from the 
south, used spirants.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: MarjorieAlley AT cs.com
> 
> Hi ---
> 
> I am curious about why the hard pe in the Hebrew names Pinchas (English
> Phinehas) and Peleg are spelled with a phi instead of a pi in the LXX.
> 
> Why did the LXX spirantize the pe when they transliterated the names?  Does
> this reflect a different Hebrew pronunciation of the names or is there some
> other reason?
> 
> And I wonder why the English transliteration carried over the phi for
> Phinehas, but not for Peleg?
> 
> Does anyone have some thoughts on this? It's just something I'm curious 
> about.
> 
> Thanks,
> Marjorie Alley

-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm