Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] T-SADE


> I do not buy the theory that the Latins learned the alphabet from the
> Greeks, as some of the letter forms appear to hearken back to an earlier
> stage of development than when the Greeks got the alphabet. If my reading 
> of
> the evidence is correct, that means that the Etruscans, from whom the 
> Latins
> learned the alphabet, got it before the Greeks did, thereby making the 
> Latin
> evidence independent of the Greek evidence.
***

I don't think the Etruscan alphabet can derive directly from a Semitic 
prototype.
It must have gone through Greek before.

The general situation is:
Sigma > Etruscan s as in Greek
Tsamekh > not used (or transformed into -ks-)
Tsade > Etruscan s' (in my opinion *ts(h)
Z > Greek -zd- > Etruscan ts
There was no voiced consonant in Etruscan. Z therefore stands for ts.

If Etruscan came directly for a Semitic prototype, then ts should be written 
with Tsamekh and it is not.
Etruscan has the phonetic values of an archaic alphabet that is already 
closer to Greek than to the original Semitic system.

Arnaud Fournet
***