Biblical Hebrew Forum

["James Spinti" <JSpinti AT Eisenbrauns.com>]

Jim,

I suggest that you read a book on comparative Semitics. I have three 
suggestions that immediately came mind:
Moscati, "An Introduction to Comparative Grammar of Semitic Languages" from 
Harrassowitz
Lipinski, "Semitic Languages: Outline of a Comparative Grammar" from Peeters
Bergstrasser, "Introduction to the Semitic Languages" from Eisenbrauns.

Once you have read any of these, you will understand why words appear to 
change based on the Semitic language. The underlying Proto-Semitic root is 
the same, but the way it appears in any given language will be different. 
These differences are very regular and can be predicted.

None of your proposed roots and whimsical changes can be defended 
linguistically. I strongly suggest that you get a blog and publish your ideas 
there in an organized fashion. This has been strongly suggested before by 
many others. This would have the advantage of letting you get your ideas 
broadcast more widely.

James 

________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for more than 30 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788 

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org 
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Peter Bekins
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 10:59 AM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] XBR vs. ubburu: Hebron

> Only if the letter in question is an initial letter that later got  
> lost in
> Akkadian/Assyrian.  The permanent loss of an initial letter  
> logically implies that it was not an integral part of the root, but  
> rather was a mere prefix.

Jim,

The change of the 5 laryngeals to aleph which I alluded to in an  
earlier post - (, ), ḥ, h,and ġ - is a merger which is not  
conditioned by the position of the letter in the word. That is, ALL  
ḥ (note this is Yitzhak's X. not X_ which was preserved) changed to  
aleph. It has nothing to do with being in initial position. Thus  
Hebrew BXR 'to choose' = Akk bêru 'to choose'.

However, even if it was only in initial position such a change would  
no more prove that it was a prefix than American English /hello/  
versus British English /'allo/ proves that h- is a prefix and that  
the original word was 'lo'.

Peter Bekins
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew