Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Vadim Cherny <him AT vadimcherny.org>]

What is the consensus opinion of the original functioning of begedkefet 
pairs:

1. A difference in aspiration b/bh, or
2. Completely different sounds b/v ?

The first supposition is problematic in many environments. It is rather 
impossible to pronounce, say, yeshobhebh with long tzere vowel.

The second supposition runs against our understanding of alphabet. 
Presumably, letters were introduced to reflect sounds, and it is rather 
unlikely that two very different sounds, b/v, were recorded with the 
same letter.

If we take dagesh as post-LXX phenomenon, we're still faced with the 
same questions, whether it denoted an often unpronounceable aspiration 
change or two completely different sounds.

There seems to be a valid argument against the supposition of two 
different sounds. A "completely different" dagesh-ed version of caf 
would be indistinguishable from het, and of tav - from sin. At least caf 
and tav seems to be aspirated in un-dageshed form, kh and th, respectively,

So, a problem is this:

- presumably, dagesh always means the same thing, whether a change of 
aspiration or a new sound (sibilant?)
- at least some begedkefet pairs only differ by aspiration depending on 
dagesh, and it seems to follow that all begedkefet pairs must differ by 
aspiration
- in some environments (yeshobhebh), the aspirated versions are nearly 
unpronounceable.

Could it be that dagesh means something else, perhaps a vocal stop, 
rather than lack of aspiration or sibilance?

Vadim Cherny