Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

No, you're not wrong. Maybe you should reread the post in the context of the 
discussion. We had mentioned a theory of how proto-semitic consisted of only 
CV syllables. To which I added the theory that syllables did not contain any 
schewa vowels but that they crept in as a metter of laziness in 
pronunciation. 
As the original theoretical proto-semitic contained only CV syllables, where 
we
see CVCCV must have originally been CVCVCV and so the natural transition 
would have been from full vowel to vocal schewa to silent schewa.
 
I hope this clears up the intentions of my last post.

________________________________

From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of David P Donnelly
Sent: Wed 10/12/2005 12:01 AM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] consonant vowel order of )EHYEH & YAHWEH



[b-hebrew] consonant vowel order of )EHYEH & YAHWEH
Read, James C K0434995 at kingston.ac.uk
Tue Oct 11 17:36:38 EDT 2005
James C Read says:
>>>
This could also explain and harmonise the contradiction that we see
between scholarly reconstruction 'yahweh'
with archaic theophoric components 'yaho'
e.g. yahoweh, yah:weh (vocal schewa), yahweh (silent schewa)
>>>

Am I in error to believe that the shewa in YaH:WeH is a silent shewa,
being used as a syllable divider,
in a Hebrew word composed of two closed [i.e. CVC] syllables?

Dave Donnelly
_______________________________________________
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 kgraham0938 AT comcast.net  Wed Oct 12 09:08:40 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 sccrmhc13.comcast.net (sccrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.202.64])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98A374C00C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 09:08:40 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from 204.127.205.142 (smailcenter60.comcast.net[204.127.205.160])
        by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP
        id <2005101213084001300b9ru7e>; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:08:40 +0000
Received: from [69.136.149.33] by 204.127.205.142;
        Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:08:39 +0000
From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:08:39 +0000
Message-Id: 
<101220051308.28183.434D0AD7000B87A400006E172207002953C8CCC7CF030E080E9D0905 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] bethulah equals virgin?
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, 12 Oct 2005 13:08:40 -0000

@Yigal & Steve:

Hey Yigal, I was wondering why do you think in Joel 1:8 that the women is 
only betrothed?  I have heard that before but never knew the reason behind 
it.  Usually, I just translate BA`AL N:`WREYHA as husband of her youth.



--
Kelton Graham
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

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

> Hi Steve,
>
> Bethulah means "virgin". Na'arah neans "young woman" - either unmarried or
> betrothed but unconsumated. Ahasuerus collected "na'aroth bethuloth" "young
> virgins", kept them in his harem, but only consumated his "marriage" to them
> after a year - up to that point, they were still virgins. So that in 2:17,
> Esther is compaired to the other "women" and "virgins".
>
> 2:19 seems to be a problem, since afetr their first night with the king, the
> women were no longer virgins. Might it mean that he had a second round of
> collectng virgins; maybe this was why Mordecai was worried - he thought that
> Esther had failed at her mission!
>
> Joel 1:8 compares Israel to a betrothed virgin whose husband died before
> consumation.
>
> Deut. 22:19 uses both terms to reffer to her previous status, since that is
> what the husband is challenging.
>
> Yigal
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Miller"
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 4:22 AM
> Subject: [b-hebrew] bethulah equals virgin?
>
>
> >I came across this in my daily reading:
> >
> > In Esther 2:17, 19, the Hebrew word betulah seems to refer to married
> > women:
> >
> > In 2:2 and 2:3 the king's advisors advise to gather naaroth bethuloth
> > × Ö°×¢Ö¸×¨Ö¹×•×ª בְּתוּלֹות for the king. The word naaroth 
> > leaves no
> doubt that
> > the women are unmarried.
> >
> > In 2:4, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13 before the consumation of the marriage, the young
> > women are just called naaroth × Ö°×¢Ö¸×¨Ö¹×•×ª by the Bible narrative.
> >
> > In 2:14-16 their marriages to the king are consumated
> >
> > In 2:17, & 19 they are called בְּתוּלֹות but never again
> × Ö°×¢Ö¸×¨Ö¹×•×ª by the
> > Bible narrative.
> >
> > The Septuagint translates bethuloth in 2:14 as parthenos. 2:19 does not
> > exist in the Septuagint.
> >
> > These go along with Joel 1:8 & Deut 22:19.
> >
> > -Steve Miller
> > Detroit
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>From joel AT exc.com  Wed Oct 12 14:39:25 2005
Return-Path: <joel AT exc.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.4.198])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BA2A4C00C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:39:21 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from exc.com (ool-44c6ce71.dyn.optonline.net [68.198.206.113])
        by mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net
        (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-2.06 (built May 11 2005))
        with ESMTP id <0IO900BGIFT2CPG0 AT mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for
        b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:39:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (1395 bytes) by exc.com       via sendmail with 
P:stdio/R:smart_host/T:smtp
        (sender: <joel AT exc.com>)        id <m1EPlUp-000GhjC AT exc.com>    for
        hholmyard AT ont.com; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:38:35 -0400
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:38:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" <joel AT exc.com>
In-reply-to: <mailman.9.1129132802.9434.b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
To: hholmyard AT ont.com
Message-id: <m1EPlUp-000GhjC AT exc.com>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <mailman.9.1129132802.9434.b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Initial "Beged Kefet" consonants always have
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, 12 Oct 2005 18:39:25 -0000

>>NYU Press had kindly granted me persmission to put Table 6.4 from _In
>>The Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language_ on-line:
>>
>>     http://www.exc.com/JoelHoffman/Excerpts/ITB-p95.pdf
>>
>>It contains a list of some names with their Masoretic pointing and LXX
>>spelling; the Hebrew and Greek are both transliterated.
>
>HH: Thanks for posting this list of Hebrew names, LXX
>transliterations, and their respective  pronunciations in our
>alphabet. What it suggests to me is that the Greek names did not use
>a consistent transliteration system (i.e., use of K and C), and some

In the end, this is what I think, too.  My point was that the LXX does
not confirm the Masoretic work.  I agree that it doesn't generally
speak against it, either (though tri-syllabic Rebekka is a problem).
One of the points I make in my book is that transliterations are in
general a terrible way to understand a language.

-Joel M. Hoffman
 http://www.exc.com/JoelHoffman