Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Jason Hare <jaihare AT gmail.com>]

Kevin, shalom.

Of course the difference between bet and vet is not aspiration, but I
used the term to represent the difference between 'b' and 'bh' (which
has little to do with the *pronunciation* of the sound, which is
essentially indistinguishable from vav). I only use "aspirated" in
these cases as a simplified distinction between 'b' and 'bh', 'g' and
'gh', 't' and 'th', etc. Didn't mean it to be taken into a strict
linguistic context. Technically, [w] is the spirant/fricative form of
[b], but I'm being far less technical, just looking at the way these
things are transcribed.

Functionally (at least in standard Israeli Hebrew), there's no
pronounced difference between tet (ט) and tav (ת), between fricative
bet (ב) and consonantal vav (ו), or between kaf (כּ) and kof (ק).
There is often, however, a strong distinction both between alef (א)
and ayin (ע) and between chet (ח) and fricative kaf (כ). Anglos like
myself, however, generally pronounce all of the groups the same. I
mean, I am finally comfortable with hearing ayin, but I hardly ever
produce it like I hear it.

For the sake of clarity (back on topic), I generally put forward my
text in three forms: (1) with the B-Hebrew suggested transliteration;
(2) with the actual Hebrew alphabet in Unicode; and, (3) with a rough
phonetic representation. Reproducing the text in question in three
different forms reduces the chances that you will be misunderstood.
Not the quickest way to write a message, but it's useful when
clarity's at stake. Know what I mean?

Example:
KY L(WLM XSDW
כי לעולם חסדו
ki le-olam chasdo

Regards,
Jason Hare

On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Kevin Riley <klriley AT alphalink.com.au> wrote:
> I thought the use of 'h' to mark lenited sounds was given up because it is
> unnecessary?  Lenition is regular, and as long as you double the letters
> where Hebrew uses a dot, it is as easy as reading Hebrew.  I am confused by
> the use of 'aspirated' in this context, as I thought the difference was one
> of stop Vs fricative in both Hebrew and Arabic, not aspiration Vs
> non-aspiration.  Especially as it seems likely that it was the non-lenited
> stops that were aspirated.  Anyway, I would agree that using 'th' for tet is
> inappropriate.  I was taught to pronounce it as in Arabic, and the only
> Hebrew I hear these days is from my supervisor, whose family is from Iraq,
> so I was surprised that most Hebrew speakers do not do the same.  Does that
> mean that qof and kaf are also not distinguished?
>
> Kevin Riley