Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

The lack of vowel after the S of ASNAT is in line with the  
NAQDANIYM's habit of economizing on the number of vowels in a Hebrew  
word, giving thereby the language a crisp pleasant (at least to my  
ears listening to my lips) sound: NAP$-KA, B-$IBT-KA, U-B-LEKT-KA, U- 
B-$AKB-KA, TI-ZKR-U
נַפְשְׁךָ, בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ,  
וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ, וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ,  
תִּזְכְּרוּ
 etc.

If I understand it correctly, you are saying that the double n in the  
Greek rendering of the name is merely to indicate that the stress is  
on NE – to read the name as aseNEt.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Jan 26, 2012, at 8:01 PM, K Randolph wrote:

> Isaac:
>
> Look at the Masoretic points, and you can see that the second vowel  
> had completely dropped out by the time of the Masoretes. What the  
> doubled consonant following that second vowel in the LXX indicates  
> is that the preceding vowel is unstressed at the time of the LXX  
> pronunciation, but still present.
>
> But even the LXX pronunciation is not the same as Biblical  
> pronunciation. The latter has been lost, and I see no way it can be  
> recovered. But we can still read the text.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
> In Gen. 41:45 I see the name אסנת transliterated by the LXX as
> Ασεννεϑ (why the double n?)
>
> In Gen. 26:34 I see the name בשמת transliterated by the LXX as
> Βασεμμαϑ (why the double m?)
>
> Isaac Fried, Boston University