Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] phonetic writing

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Frank Polak <frankha AT post.tau.ac.il>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] phonetic writing
  • Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:50:02 +0200

Dear All,
Maybe you will find some interest in the following item:
Angel Saenz-Badiollos, A History of the Hebrew Language (E.T. John Elwolde), A History of the Hebrew Language, Cambridge UK, 1993,
pp. 76-111: ‘Biblical Hebrew in its Various Traditions’, including discussions of the testimony of the Greek and Latin transcriptions, as well as the traditions of the Palestinian (supralinear), Babylonian (supralinear) and Tiberian vocalization. The chapter on Hebrew in the Period of the Second Temple is relevant as well.

Frank Polak

Some Comments:
What we can see is that the vowel system of Hebrew in the Greek and Latin transcriptions is in some sense close to the Palestinian supralinear vocalization, a system which continues to thrive in the Sephardic pronunciation (qamatz longer than patach, but not qualitatively different), and also much like Mishnic Hebrew (according to the great ancient manuscripts, not the printed editions that reflect adaptation to TH!).
* An important similarity is that TH chireq often corresponds with an epsilon (like in Syriac >men< =THebrew >min<). The Babylonian pronunciation is reminiscent of Jacobitic Western Syriac in that the qamatz is pronounced as /o/, like Jacobitic Syriac >zeqofo< (unlike Nestorian eastern Syriac >Zeqafa<).
* Another detail is the masculine 2nd pers sing suffix >ak_<, contrasting with TH >ka< or >k_a<.
* If one follows chronology, like Kahle did, the TH form would look like a late construction. But now it is clear, from the Qumran texts, that this feature is old, and, like already argued by Bergstraesser against Kahle, reflects “proto-semitic” (at least, common to TH, Arabic and Akkadian).
*Other aspects of the transcriptions are matched by Qumran Hebrew, such as Sodom/>SWDM< in Qumran (the interchange a/o is also found in Judean Aramaic).
* The >m/n< interchange at the end of the word, the rounding off of the vowel at the word end by >n< is common to Qumran Hebrew and Hebrew/Aramaic inscriptions from the Roman-Byzantine period (YWDN = Yehuda).
* Conclusion:
Speaking from this perspective one has to say that Tiberian Hebrew reflects on the one hand ancient phenomena that had been discontinued in spoken Hebrew of the Roman-Byzantine period, and on the other hand developments that are not ancient, and are similar to features in other language traditions (or if you want, regional languages).
* By the way 1, in some passages the Tiberian punctuation may reflect alternative traditions!
* By the way 2, Biblical Hebrew is not the same as "Ancient Hebrew", even though in many respects it is related.


  • [b-hebrew] phonetic writing, Frank Polak, 10/25/2005

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page