Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>]

As I suspected. You don't actually know of any evidence do you? You just
read a few comparative linguistic papers and accepted the concensus to be
true. If you had looked into it you would find that the whole argument is
circular.

Your repetition of the theory of Akkadian phonemes doesn't add anything of
value to the discussion. Nor does copying and pasting a quick reference that
provides just as much evidence as you have (i.e. none). May I suggest you
yourself read up on the <cough>evidence<end cough> for Akkadian phonemes and
then come back to use when you realise that the whole framework you are
resting your judgements on is circular (i.e. not of the form of logical
basis an objective discussion requires).

Once you've realised this. Then we can move on from wasting breath relying
on this dodgy framework.

James Christian

2010/1/23 Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>

> *wa-yaktub JamesC
> > For the benefit of the layman who may read this and think Randall
> actually
> > knows what he's talking about I would present this question to Randall so
> > that the layman can see how and if he can even answer it:
> >
> > Akkadian being a dead language on what transliteration evidence are you
> > basing your 'knowledge' of Akkadian pronunciation?
>
> I don't really see the above as a good faith question, nor knowledge based,
>  but personal. The moderators may have a word to add.
>
> In addition, it confuses several issues.
> First, it distracts from a discussion of phonemes and confuses
> "pronunciation"
> for a phonemic inventory. Secondly, it distracts from the Western Semitic
> orientation of my answer.
>
> If you are interested in the thread, go back and read it.
> The thread initiator assumed three Akkadian vowels--which is the accepted
> inventory for Akkadian, plus 'e' with/from pharygeals (and perhaps an
> 'o' to balance
> the 'e', but not attested in writing to my knowledge. [The hundreds of
> sign-value
> combinations throughout Akkadian dialects truly requires a 'scorecard'. See
> Rene Labat.])
>
> For the history of the decipherment of Akkadian, I suggest reading up
> on Rawlinson
> and the Behistun Inscription, who was working from Old Persian to
> Babylonian
> (an Akkadian dialect). You can follow up with Akkadian studies thru the
> 20th
> century.
>
> Finally, pronunciation is not the issue but the phonemic system. It is
> impossible
> to know the "color" of ancient vowels without a recording, but a minimum
> number
> of phonemes can be determined. The spices in the pie are irrelevant, it is
> the
> number of pieces that we are discussing (i.e., the abstract-units that
> were used
> by speakers to differentiate meaning). Just like the three phonemic vowels
> of
> ProtoBHebrew, Canaanite, and Ugaritic. As mentioned, these did develop into
> a five phonemic-vowel system in Hebrew,
> which was apparently the system in place before the later Masoretic system.
>
> And again, reference to Jouon-Muraoka and Bauer-Leander is recommended.
>
> blessings
> Randall
>
>
> --
> Randall Buth, PhD
> www.biblicalulpan.org
> randallbuth AT gmail.com
> Biblical Language Center
> Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>