Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] music in Hebrew [was Re: Long: *Some* Bib for Bryan]

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rochelle Altman <willaa AT netvision.net.il>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] music in Hebrew [was Re: Long: *Some* Bib for Bryan]
  • Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:32:01 +0200

At 02:20 AM 1/26/2006, Peter Kirk wrote:
On 25/01/2006 17:18, Rochelle Altman wrote:.

Now, in the cases of "l-" and "b-", the MT allots the vowel to the particle instead of the consonant. Why? Because it is the same vowel phoneme. In fact, this allotment does not mean that the vowel attached to the aleph was not enunciated; it was. Look at the pronunciation: la do nai. It was merely subsumed into one phoneme.

OK, we now agree: the pronunciation is not le-'a-do-nai but la-do-nai, three syllables. But earlier you wrote in your "Final vowels added to all C" version of Psalm 96 "le Adonai", which looks like four syllables to me. My point was that this would have been pronounced la-do-nai, three syllables, and you now seem to agree.

Yes, and no. I was quoting the MT. Before I was adding the extra vowels. According to the MT pointing, the vowel was apocopated by proximity. Hence, it was perceived as "la" and not "le"

Rhythmically, ADNI remained three syllables.

What I find interesting is that two examples of apocopated forms, final vowels lost, "l-" and "b-" are being used here to illustrate how Hebrew remained CV and never lost or reduced weak final vowels until the post-exilic period.

Well, it is possible that these forms were apocopated or elided only at the same time as or after the final short vowels were lost, but these are distinct phonetic processes which did not necessarily took place at the same time.

Extremely unlikely that vowels will be lost from different words at the same time -- with one exception: reformers decide that they write the rules. .

I said I had no intention of getting into this aspect; because the evidence denies that Hebrew, unlike darn near every other Semitic or IE language, never lost weak finals. The mechanisms of vowel loss are diverse. Note that when ADNI or YHVH stands alone, apparent aphaeresis does not occur.

No one denies that Hebrew lost weak final vowels. The issue is, when? Arabic also lost its weak final vowels, but only after the Qur'an was written down. Hebrew lost its weak final vowels earlier. How much earlier? We don't know. It had almost certainly lost them by the end of the Second Temple period. But had it lost them before the time of the Babylonian Exile? That question is not so easily answered.

Religious song is extremely conservative; the melodies constrain just how much can be added or subtracted and still retain the rhythm. Without a bilingual, we have no way to cross-check if and when changes occurred. We have a bilingual for the Psalms.

Syncope is the most common cause of apocopation in Semitic languages -- with the *second* vowel lost or reduced. Another very common mechanism is apocopation by proximity, that is, loss of a vowel phoneme because two vowels are perceptually the same. The apparent lack of vowel pointing for the alef is apocopation by proximity -- and the wrong consonant was assigned the vowel. In apocopation by proximity, it is the *first* vowel that is lost; not the second.

Understood. But this is not a mistake, because the rules of Hebrew pointing are that unpronounced consonants are not pointed, and that unpointed consonants (except at word end, excluding he) are not pronounced. So, for la-do-nai, it must be the silent alef rather than the lamed which is unpointed, and so the lamed has to carry the vowel point.

Agreed, however, that's the way the Masoretes perceived it.

Well, Kimchi said that the Masoretes were no grammarians; it's pretty clear that they had tin ears, too.

I am sorry, I arrived at 1:00 am and have had to plow through more than 700 messages -- I am too tired to continue right now. Hope I'm not too confusing in this note.
Thank you for your attention. I'm not sure that I follow the relevance of the Old English, but you make sense about the Hebrew.

The relevance of the Old English is that the Psalms are a translation from an old consonantal Hebrew vorlage -- and our bilingual. Information on when vowels phonemes were lost appears in the pre-exilic Psalms.

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

Thank yuo for your intererst,

Rochelle Altman







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page