Biblical Hebrew Forum

[jimstinehart AT aol.com]

Kevin Riley:
 
You wrote:  “You might notice, just in passing, that all the Semitic 
languages except Akkadian start words with a consonant.  Therefore only 
Akkadian has an initial A.  Does that not suggest, especially when you take 
into account everything known about Akkadian, that perhaps there was no 
initial 'true vowel A', but in fact an ) ?”
 
That seems to make sense, but if you are right about that, then how do you 
explain the “vanishing yod” phenomenon?  I had tentatively thought that 
perhaps a true vowel A could be represented in Hebrew alternatively by )Y or 
just ).  But if you’re saying that the aleph we see in these words is a true 
consonantal aleph, then how do you explain the fact that most of these words, 
although their full form begins )YL, can alternatively be spelled in 
shortened form beginning with )L?  That’s what I’m struggling with.  HALOT 
gives at least 7 examples of that widespread phenomenon regarding these words:
 
(1)  p. 48:  “I )L > I )YL ram, tyrant”
 
(2)  p. 48:  “II )L > II )YL big tree”
 
(3)  p. 48:  “III )L > III )YL pillar”
 
(4)  p. 51:  )LH is a “unitary noun from II )YL”
 
(5)  p. 54:  Regarding )LWN at Judges 4: 11, “MSS )YLWN”.  That is to say, 
many manuscripts have an interior yod, though the Masoretic text does not.
 
(6)  p. 40:  The words for both “ram” and “deer” (or “stag”) in Hebrew are 
)YL.  But the Ugaritic cognate for “ram” is il, with no yod whatsoever, 
whereas the Ugaritic cognate for “deer” is ’yl, with a yod, and in Syriac 
“deer” is ’iyyala, with a consonantal yod.
 
(7)  p. 41:  )WLM vs. )LM vs. )LM:  “orthography varies”.
 
Why does that interior yod seem to be optional in so many of these cases?  My 
main problem is not so much with the initial aleph, but rather is how to 
explain the “vanishing yod” in so many of these words.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois