>The point is, however, that the LXX transliterations are reasonably
consistent with the Masoretes. Dagesh kal is the only difference - that stop
It's getting difficult for me to keep up with the deluge of messages
on this topic, but I'll try to reply briefly at least to this one.
Dagesh Kal is of course not the only difference. We have already
established that the syllabification differs (e.g., Rikva / Rebekka).
We further find that the LXX has double letters that frequently do not
correspond to anything in the Tiberian version.
Additionally, we find inconsistent koof/kaf and tet/taf distinctions,
And the vowels compare very poorly.
As with many of your messages, here you account for one observation in
a way that contradicts your other accounts. Here you assume that the
LXX forms were the original ones, but for Rebekka you assume that the
TH form was original.
This is another example. Your claim that XuPah naturally becomes
Oxxoffa because the Greeks took a breath before x is inconsistent
with, e.g., Xava vs. Eua. Yet again, look at the table:
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.