Biblical Hebrew Forum

[davedonnelly1 <davedonnelly1 AT juno.com>]

Hi George,
you wrote:

>>>
Dave,

I think you might have misunderstood my point (excuse the pun). 
A composite shewa is still grammatically of the same value as a simple
shewa. 
There is no grammatical difference. The fact that an aleph takes a
composite 
and a yodh a simple shewa amounts to practically no grammatical
difference. 
So the fact that the Tetragrammaton is marked with a simple shewa 
as opposed to the composite shewa beneath the aleph of ADONAI means
nothing.
It is still a shewa in both cases, and that it is the point.


GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au
>>>

George,

I thank you for your reply.
Last night, Garth Grenache sent me an e-mail on this issue. 

Among other things he said:

"The compound shewas are made up of two components:
        the shewa which marks vowel quantity (a reduced vowel)
        and
        the a,e,o which marks vowel quality (whether it is a,e, or o)."

George, 

Would you comment on this issue again 
using the terms "Vowel quantity" and "Vowel quality" ?
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________

George,
 
I am changing the subject here (below the line)

Are you familiar with Wikinfo.
It is  very similar to Wikipedia except that it allows  Original
research.

  

>>>
Original research which addresses significant problems is especially
appreciated.
Dictionary definitions, links to websites, quotations, source texts,
and other types of information not acceptable on Wikipedia are welcome.
To edit and have complete access to Wikinfo's features,
please Create an account and login. 
>>>[dismiss]


In 2007, I started a topic titled:

Can Theophoric names be derived from "Yahweh"?

Of course I only have a kindergarten / first grade knowledge of Hebrew,
but Garth Grenache was willing to add his thought to this issue.

Garth believes that the original pronunciation of God's name may be
"Yahwa",
and he definitely believes that theophoric names can be derived from
"Yahwa".

Like Wikipedia, Wikinfo provides all the Hebrew Unicodes to write
articles
using Biblical Hebrew font.

The Biblical Hebrew font is very good.
It looks good on the computer screen, and it looks even better when
printed out. 

George,

Would you be willing to discuss;
" Can Theophoric names be derived from "Yahweh" 
[or from "Yahwa"]
on Wikinfo, using Hebrew Unicodes. 

P.S. For all practical purposes no posts were made on this topic 
for a two year period, 2007-2009
but I have been cleaning up the article for the last few weeks, 
and it seems to be looking better.

I still have work to do on changing the present Hebrew font to Hebrew
Unicodes.

Two areas are being worked on at basically the same time.
Garth Grenache has presented his views on "Yahwa" 
and has demonstrated that Theophoric names can be derived from "Yahwa"
while,
I have been trying to demonstrate that 
"Yahweh" could be prefixed to Nathan to create "Yehonahan".
I have been unsuccessful, although the Jewish Encyclopedia of the early
1900's 
[plus William Smith's 1863 "A Dictionary of the Bible"] 
both seems to indicate that it can be done.

Sincerely yours,
Dave Donnelly
____________________________________________________________
Love Spell
Click here to light up your life with a love spell!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=H4jL50nQ6Ead7wTe4z9wXgAAJ1BVGyITH_OGb159rldJgo3SAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARwAAAAA=
>From jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com  Thu Feb 25 10:24:06 2010
Return-Path: <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id B46914C015; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:24:06 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from mail-bw0-f210.google.com (mail-bw0-f210.google.com
        [209.85.218.210])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CE504C013
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:24:05 -0500 
(EST)
Received: by bwz2 with SMTP id 2so3617952bwz.30
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 07:24:04 -0800 
(PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.130.72 with SMTP id r8mr832562bks.25.1267111444244; Thu, 
        25 Feb 2010 07:24:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <acd782171002212028j64f4f191q3a342f980292ca1a AT mail.gmail.com>
References: <1906BD796D364372ABC55A1FF1ADB28B@homeiavnpau67c>
        <acd782171002212028j64f4f191q3a342f980292ca1a AT mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:24:04 +0200
Message-ID: <4f3a6171002250724n54d19debocecbe2dc6c35e494 AT mail.gmail.com>
From: James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>
To: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Gen 10:25 dividing the earth
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:24:06 -0000

Hi Doug,

for what it's worth I'd have to side with those who have already commented
on the contextual relevance to the story of the division of the peoples of
the earth caused by the division of their language. The contextual evidence
is just far too great. I can see where some people are coming from in their
attempts to harmonise this historical record with scientific theories but
close inspection of the text just shows that these things simply aren't
there. Peleg lived in the time the world was divided into different nations
with different languages. There is simply no contextual clue which would
give an average reader without some kind of pseudo-scientific agenda to the
conclusion that Peleg was called such because of the formation of the
continents. If Peleg lived outside of the time of the division of the world
into different nations then the pseudo-scientific theory might be worth
considering. As it stands, quite bluntly, it isn't.

James Christian