Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:Here is a summary of part of Patrick Bennett's reconstruction from "Comparative Semitic Linguistics", using Unicode for the phonetic symbols with an English-based equivalent following:
.....Phoenician certainly had Samekh.
Does anyone remember a case of Phoenician Sin (that is, of a Shin being used
for an /s/)?
Yigal
Not off hand,( can't locate my KAI at the moment).
It it is interesting that there are are cases where the persumed proto-Semitic Sin becomes a Shin in BH -- compare Shams in Arabic to Shemesh .
Also, one should keep in mind that the original Tha did not have a special
letter in Heb., and other NW Semitic dialects, and becomes a Shin in BH --
compare Thaur in Arabic to Shor.
Does anyone have a definite idea about the difference in original
pronounciation between the Samekh and the Sin?
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.