Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rochelle Altman <willaa AT netvision.net.il>]

At 01:16 AM 1/15/2006, Peter Kirk wrote:

> > ...
> >
> > That's the point; if it is postulated that CVC did not occur until 
> > post-exilic times, then we have to add the vowel to "l-" ... It's why I 
> > included the "l-"    Technically, on the same grounds I should have 
> > included a vowel for "b" in the 29th.
>
> I think you have missed my point. If the alef in l-'adonay(a) is silent, 
> we have la-do-na-ya, all CV syllables. You also have a non-permitted 
> consonant cluster in "ha-artza" (even taking "tz" as one consonant), oddly 
> considering that there isn't one in the Masoretic Hebrew; this needs to be 
> something like ha-aratza.

IF the alef is silent, yes. Was it? The alef had better not be silent in 
the 23rd, for instance.
Here we have a clearly marked three syllable "a-do-nai."  Shall we change 
the psalm formula to be  "silent-do-nai" opening the song to prove that (1) 
yhvh is two-syllables and (2) Hebrew -- unlike Aramaic, had no tendency 
whatsoever to lose final weak vowels? The same psalm formula is used in the 
33rd... three syllable opening. (It's also the formula for Shir Ha-Shirim.)

That is what a bilingual is for; cross-checks. Adonai is three syllables in 
every occurrence by cross-checks in the Psalter. It sure is in the 23rd -- 
nary a particle in sight -- and that does raise a very big "if" that the 
alef was silent.

Now I know from research how many commentators like to amend the text of 
the 23rd to meet expectations -- for instance, Kraus -- who, for example, 
thinks that "na'ot" in "na'ot deshe" should be deleted as he feels it ruins 
the meter. Problem: "na'ot" just happens to be the noun; deshe the modifier 
-- it describes what kind of na'ot. Chop out the noun; who needs it.. It 
reins the postulated 4/4 beat.

Then, I said that I wrote as pronounced, not M-C. "tz" is, of course, one 
consonant... I just couldn't get myself to write haaratza. It throws off a 
very regular meter -- indeed, the very regularity of meter in the 
translations of Psalms 100-150 in this Psalter gave it the name of the 
"Metrical Psalms."

Please note that we need the first and last verses to reconstruct the music 
of a psalm. The Psalm formula is given in the first verse. The Psalm 
formula is also what tells us whether we are dealing with Sephardic, 
Ashkenazic, or Yemenite versions of the Psalms. The melodies in that 
Psalter are Sephardic and they are also at the original, pre-Neo-Platonic 
tempi. This is hardly surprising considering the age of the consonantal 
vorlage used, but it does mean that we have yet another linguistic trap to 
watch out for.

I've run out of time.

Regards,

Rochelle Altman

> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/