Biblical Hebrew Forum

["K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Peter:

I just did a spot check of names ending with a waw ayin as how they
were transliterated in the LXX: some of the names expressed the
furtive patach (though not always with a patach) and others did not.
The same with names ending with a waw chet. Without checking further,
I suspect the same with the other letters that take the furtive
patach.

Seeing as the Egyptian pronunciation of Hebrew was already changed
from Biblical, it is hard to say if the furtive patach was added, or
subtracted from Biblical pronunciation.

Karl W. Randolph.

On 2/23/07, Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org> wrote:
> On 23/02/2007 13:37, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
> > ...
> > Had this form survived into Biblical Hebrew, the vocalization would
> > probably have been laqiax, since the i: was split (in my opinion, for
> > musical liturgical purposes) and the het influenced the second part of
> > the split.  This is the furtive patax phenomenon that Uri was talking
> > about, and it probably took place after the first century CE if we
> > compare the name Jesus where it is not observed.
> >
> >
> There is no sign of furtive patah in this Greek form of Joshua/Jeshua,
> but there is in the Greek form Messias (Messiah) from Hebrew Mashiach,
> also found in the New Testament. (Compare Arabic Masih, which has never
> had the furtive patah.) The difference may be that the latter could have
> been quite a recent loan into Greek, whereas the form Iesous/Jesus goes
> back at least to LXX. From this limited sample of evidence which in fact
> must be much wider, it seems likely that furtive patah became widespread
> some time between the 3rd century BCE and the 1st century CE.
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> E-mail:  peter AT qaya.org
> Blog:    http://www.qaya.org/blog/
> Website: http://www.qaya.org/