Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Ex 6:6 hiphil imperative 'bring' (K Randolph)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Chris Watts <dekruidnootjes AT eircom.net>
  • To: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>, Jerry Shepherd <jshepherd53 AT gmail.com>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Ex 6:6 hiphil imperative 'bring' (K Randolph)
  • Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:53:42 +0100

Hi Karl, well jut one thing that gets me thinking, I do remember in Judges somewhere, that there is evidence of two dialects, one of the tribes could not pronounce the shin as 'sh' but only as 's'. So how would you account for that?
Chris Watts
Ireland
Chris Watts
Ireland



On 16 Jul 2013, at 13:13, K Randolph wrote:

Chris:

When I studied Hebrew in class in college, my professor taught us the
Yemenite pronunciation. The reason given was that this was the only dialect
that gives voice to all the points as indicated by the Masoretes.

The father of modern Israeli Hebrew came from a German speaking background,
so was unable to pronounce some of the phones found in Yemenite Hebrew, one
of which was the waw. Hence the vov with the same pronunciation as the vet..

Since college I have come to the conclusion that my professor, by extension
his professors as well, were wrong, that in Biblical times there was no
difference in pronunciation of the BeGaD KeFaT. Nor any difference between
the Sin and Shin.

Yeah, this is off the subject, but a pleasant diversion.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Chris Watts <dekruidnootjes AT eircom.net>wrote:

just a quick interjection here, and not taking sides since it is hard to
follow. But it was said that Karl pronounces vav as a 'w'. Well I read a
long time ago that the yemenite jews were considered to have a purer
pronounciation than the western jews, this was written by an israeli,
unfortunately I really can not remember where I read this. Anyway they
pronounced all their vavs as 'w' and also they made distinctions between a
soft 'gimmel and a hard gimmel (like the english gerrard for example) and
also a they made distinctions between a hard tav and a soft tav (almost
like the 'th' in there). Now this probably has no bearing on the present
discussion, but I thought perhaps it note worthy of interest. Especially
since I do remember very clearly that odd statement by the Jewish linguist
who wrote the article saying that he considered this to be a 'purer'
pronounciation. I thought that maybe he knew something that would have been
interesting to learn, but he never talked about why he thought that, pity.


Chris Watts
Ireland








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page