Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

I am not sure why there is a double n in Phennana, the same way I am  
not sure why there is a double m and a double t and a double e in the  
English word committee, yet only one m in coming.

It is hard to believe, yet the LXX may have confused the look-alike  
Hebrew letters H and X, as well as R and D (is there any work on the  
rendering of the Hebrew names by the LXX?). For PIYNXAS of Num. 25:7  
they have the curious Φινεες, yet Gen. 11 they "correctly"  
render NAXOR as Ναχωρ, but ,then, TERAX is suddenly made into  
Θαρα. Did they see the last X of TERAX as a silent H? The name  
IRAD עירד of Gen. 4:18 is made into Γαιδαδ.

To return to Phennana, the MT has it as PNINAH with a dagesh in the  
second N as is customary after a xirik sans yod. I notice with  
interest that they read the first letter of this name as a "soft" F  
and not as the "hard" P of today. The second N of PNINAH has a dagesh  
'forte' and yet this N is not "geminated". On the other hand they  
render the city name AKO (with a dagesh in the K as customary after a  
patax) of Jud. 1:31 as Ακχω.
It is all, unfortunately, very bewildering. I tend to think that the  
LXX are mostly wrong, and the MT right; Αρμαϑαιμ and Σιϕα  
just don't sound right to me (as well as the funny Phennana).

Yes, indeed, the Editors of the Oxford Hebrew-English dictionary have  
removed all dgeshim, except in B K P, and also all the unnecessary  
schwas. I love it.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Apr 28, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Will Parsons wrote:

> I don't have a copy of the Oxford English-Hebrew dictionary; does  
> it really
> remove all dgeshim or just those where it doesn't make a difference  
> to the
> modern pronunciation?