Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

It is not clear to me what you mean by or why you insist on  
"vocalization". Nowadays, as soon as we see a dot in the Hebrew  
letter bet we instinctively vocalize it as an English B, otherwise,  
we vocalize it as the English V, to wit: BA-U, yet, U-VA-U. I think  
that this change of sound in the presence of a dagesh is a mere  
historical coincidence, that came now to bedevil the Hebrew language.  
We can safely ignore it here.
In Deu. 1:28 it is, indeed, VA-RAM, translated as "and ('and' being  
from the Latin ante, 'opposite', and of the same sense as 'end')  
taller". It stands to reason that this attached VA used to be a  
separate word with a meaning of its own within the Hebrew language.  
What is it, then? I think it is BA (read it VA) in disguise, and  
meaning 'be' in the sense of 'is' or 'are', namely: "AM GADOL (is)  
RAM from us".

Isaac Fried, Boston University


On Jan 30, 2011, at 11:48 AM, fred burlingame wrote:

> Hello Isaac:
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Perhaps a further example, will illustrate my lack of understanding  
> of your point.
>
> In genesis 6:13, we have participle בא vocalized as "bah."
>
> In deuteronomy 1:28, we have participle (plus prefixed conjunction)  
> ורם vocalized as "vah-ram."
>
> Are you saying, that "vah-ram" should properly be vocalized "bah- 
> ram?" Or that that the original pronunciation of "vah-ram" was "bah- 
> ram?"
>
> Because "bah" on one hand; and "vah" or "wah" on the other, sound  
> significantly different to me.
> regards,
>
> fred burlingame
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
> BA and WA sound nowadays exactly the same (forget the confusing  
> dagesh), but are used alternatively to create a visual (VISUAL!)  
> distinction between words that sound the same and have essentially  
> the same core meaning. As I said before, no one would think of  
> registering (REGISTERING!) his daughter's name as ZIYB-AH זיבה,  
> but ZIYW-AH זיוה (which sounds exactly the same) is very fine.
>
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
>
> On Jan 30, 2011, at 2:01 AM, fred burlingame wrote:
>
> > Hello Isaac:
> >
> > Thanks for your comments.
> >
> > I appreciate your analysis.
> >
> > I don't understand however, the visual trick that moves the letter  
> > vocalized as "bet" and appearing as ב into the letter vocalized as  
> > "waw" and appearing as ו . I suppose that the sounds "BA" and "WA"  
> > could be mistaken for one another. I also understand that you  
> > refer to this process more precisely as waw becoming a variant of  
> > bet.
> >
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > fred burlingame
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
> > The letter B is the root of BA, 'come', which is 'to be' (BA it is  
> > not a process but the state of being present). So, WAYIGA$ sounds  
> > to me BA)-HIY)-GA$, which is exactly what it is. Writing W for B  
> > is just a visual trick to momentarily blind us. The word ZIYB-AH,  
> > 'pus' is disgusting, but ZIYW-AH, 'shine, emit electromagnetic  
> > pus', is a cute Hebrew girl's name.
> >
> > Isaac Fried, Boston University
> >
> > On Jan 29, 2011, at 11:49 PM, fred burlingame wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Isaac;
> > >
> > > That was a clever turn of a phrase.
> > >
> > > How do you reach the conclusion that the root, single letter B,  
> > > means basically "come, be, exist, have substance?" By reasoning  
> > > back from the actual usages of the descendant or child, two and  
> > > three letter roots?
> > >
> > > Does your paragraph "2" below imply a past tense for the "qatal"  
> > > form, subject to usage exceptions?
> > >
> > > Very interesting that the ancient hebrew language enjoyed more  
> > > flexibility than the modern language. It sounds like the  
> > > evolution of languages mirrors the evolution of governments ...  
> > > more and more rules.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > fred burlingame
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
> > > 1. Grammaticalization made the language ever more formal and  
> > > rigid, yet, WA-YI-$LAX essentially means (it come to pass that)- 
> > > (he)-(send).
> > > 2, "qatal' is just short for he-qatal-him, the past being the  
> > > "natural" tense for an act.
> > > 3. I don't give a hoot for the opinion of "mainstream" educators,  
> > > book sellers and academics. They are to me the ox snugly  
> > > following the rut.
> > > 4. The letter B is the root of BA, 'come, be, exist, have  
> > > substance'.
> > >
> > > Isaac Fried, Boston University