Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] T-SADE

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>
  • To: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>, "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] T-SADE
  • Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 04:51:20 +0200


----- 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
***








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page