Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Dagesh

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Kevin Riley <klriley AT alphalink.com.au>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Dagesh
  • Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:32:48 +1100

As the dagesh in Hebrew and Aramaic are explicable without reference to Hurrian, why would we bother to take that route? It is observable in a number of languages where lenition occurs that it is often blocked by geminate consonants. Whether that is indicated by doubling the letter, placing a dagesh within it, or any other devise one can think of, seems incidental. The same sounds are lenited in Greek, in Irish (which traditionally marked the lenited consonant with a dot), and in even more obscure languages around the world. While the change is unique to Aramaic and Hebrew (or, at least, the marking of it is) among the Semitic languages, it is a process that is familiar to most linguists. There is no need for an external influence, especially for one that ceased to exist centuries before we have any evidence of lenition existing in Hebrew and Aramaic. By natural, homegrown linguistic processes Hebrew and Aramaic came to have lenited and unlenited consonants. Marking the unlenited consonant with the same mark as used to indicate doubling is obvious if it is the geminate consonants that are not lenited. To extend that to the comparatively rare cases when a single consonant was not lenited is not a big leap, especially if gemination has been lost.

Kevin Riley

On 26/10/2010 4:20 PM, Bryant J. Williams III wrote:
Dear Jim,

This list is about BIBLICAL HEBREW, not HURRIAN. I really do care about
knowing
Biblical Hebrew. Cognate languages may be able to assist in determining the
meaning of a hapax legomenon or words used less than 10 times, but usually are
not able to help in determining meaning since it is the context that is the
determining factor in ALL cases. Just because something is possible, does not
mean that it is probable or certain. I remind myself often that ALL we have is
the text everything else is supposition or even presupposition.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
----- Original Message -----
From:<JimStinehart AT aol.com>
To:<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 7:20 AM
Subject: [b-hebrew] Dagesh


On another thread, Kenneth Greifer humorously wrote: “I have been on
B-Hebrew for a few years, and I know that you can never fail if you discuss
dageshes and schwas. You should see how excited they get if someone asks why a
dagesh is someplace…. Be careful about asking too many questions about
dageshes because you don't want to overexcite some of the older B-Hebrew
members.”
But all kidding aside, did the Hebrew dagesh concept originate from
Hurrian?

In Hurrian, Hebrew and Aramaic, and perhaps in no other languages, B and P
soften when between vowels, except when doubled. Did the Hebrew dagesh,
which prevents such softening by doubling B or P, come from Hurrian, which has
the same written phenomenon as to P? That is the tentative suggestion at
pp. 56-57 of Frederic William Bush, “A Grammar of the Hurrian Language”
(1964) [where I will use<<…>> for the two footnotes, and anything in brackets
represents my own comments]:

“Hurrian did not tolerate doubled voiced stops [e.g., B] but only doubled
voiceless stops [e.g., P]…. Now, the fact that the three fricatives of
Hurrian (the labial [B and P], the dental and the velar) exhibit this exact
same
pattern is suggestive. …This pattern of non-phonemic, inter-vocalic
[between vowels] spirantization [softening, where B is pronounced V in Hebrew,
and
P is pronounced PH in Hurrian and Hebrew] which is lost when the consonants
are doubled immediately brings to mind the very similar pattern of the
Hebrew stops.<<FN 59 The so-called begadkephat letters. This is a feature
of
Aramaic as well. Here [in Hurrian] it occurs in post-vocalic position
also.>> This is a pattern that is unique among the Semitic languages, and
hence
it seems likely that it is due to some exterior influence. Perhaps this
development is due to the influence of Hurrian during the formative period of
the Aramaic and Canaanite dialects during the latter half of the second
millennium.<<FN 60: It must be noted that the Hebrews [but Jim says: No
way!
The Hebrews’ experience with the Hurrians was in Canaan in the 14th
century BCE] and the Arameans originated in just those areas of North Syrian
and
North-west Mesopotamia where Hurrian penetration was particularly strong.
Although direct evidence is lacking, the close association of the Hurrians
with other Semitic groups as at Nuzi and Alalah renders a similar relationship
between the Hurrians and the ancestors of the Arameans and Canaanites
entirely within the realm of possibility.>> …This remains, however, the
most
tentative of suggestions.”

Is this fundamental Hebrew grammar feature of doubling a P [i.e., using a
dagesh] in writing to indicate the rare situation where P, even though
surrounded by vowels, does not soften to PH, coming from Hurrian? Apparently
Hebrew and Aramaic are the only Semitic languages that have this Hurrian-type
feature.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/696 - Release Date: 02/21/2007
3:19
PM

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page