Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] phonetic writing, was Initial "Beged Kefet" consonants always have a...

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Karl Randolph <kwrandolph AT email.com>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] phonetic writing, was Initial "Beged Kefet" consonants always have a...
  • Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 18:39:36 +0100

On 25/10/2005 18:14, Karl Randolph wrote:

Peter:

But that's just the point. While the number of names that Joel Hoffman presented is small, that the same names have radically different pronunciations calls all the pronunciation schema into question. ...


I don't see why the variations in Greek transliterations, generally made by people whose grasp of Hebrew was inadequate, calls into question the Tiberian pronunciation of Hebrew.

... Further, none of the pronunciation points nor transliterations were extant when there were still native speakers of Biblical Hebrew to interview. The earliest was generations later. Who knows what changed before.


This is not true. There were certainly still mother tongue speakers of Hebrew when LXX was translated. But they probably were not in Alexandria where it was translated. Josephus is a different matter, as he surely knew mother tongue speakers of Hebrew in Jerusalem before it fell.

And I will add to that that even within the tradition of the Masoretic points, it is demonstrable that some of them are wrong. Remember, I gave an example concerning Proverbs 1:19 a while back.


Well, no human work is perfect. The Masoretic text has a few clear errors, although remarkably few considering its size and complexity, and the absence of computer checks!

The probability that after 1000 years of war, upheaval, no native speakers, exiles, foreign accents and so forth, that the MT should accurately preserve Biblical pronunciation is a vanishingly small probability. Hence I can confidently claim that the Masoretic points do not reflect Biblical pronunciations.


I agree that it is highly improbable that the Masoretic text is 100% accurate in reflecting "biblical" pronunciations, whatever you might mean by that. But that is absolutely no help to us in determining what changes might have taken place.

--
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