Hello Randall: Thanks for your incisive comments.
The punctuation beneath יבא in לא יבא באש (numbers 31:23) appears to include a conjunctive "merkha" rather than a disjunctive "tiphchah" (as that latter mark appears under באש ). I note however, that the "merkha" under יבא appears to enclose an additional "dot." I don't know the meaning of the dot. http://www.tanach.us/Tanach.xml#Num31:1-31:54 http://www.tms.edu/FacultyDocuments/HebrewAccentsrev.pdf Given the immense amount of precision the masorete scribes assigned to their text, I find it a little surprising that they would have divided phrases between יבא and באש . regards, fred burlingame On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Randall Buth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 8:03 PM, fred burlingame <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hello Randall: > > > > Thanks for your comments. > > > > I guess I am a little confused. > > > > a. I thought that the earliest vocalization code (nikkud) that we have, > > equals the 1,000 a.d., masoretic text ("MT"); and that text encodes > > vocalization for this verse's use of באש as "va-esh," twice. > > > > b. Then, the pronunciation "ba-esh" is encoded the third time because of > the > > disjunctive לא ? appearing in the preceding few words? > > The 'disjunctive' is the "tvir" accent mark on "yavo" which marks the > phrase > boundaries. the third ba-esh begins a new phrase and thus is a hard > 'b' according to the bgdkpt alterations. > If a reader chose to read that third "lo yavo va-esh" as one phrase > then the bet would have been soft since it followed a vowel. The MT, > of course, did not choose that. > > braxot > Randall Buth > > > c. I don't see how we know the earlier (than 1,000 a.d.) pronunciation > for > > באש customarily becomes "ba-esh?" > > > > Perhaps i am simply mis-reading your post. > > > > regards, > > > > fred burlingame > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Randall Buth <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> comments follow this of Kevin: > >> > >> Kevin: > >> The lentition of the letters bgdkpt is usually placed much later. Many > >> think it came in after the Exile. So the answer is no, no C12th BCE > >> Hebrew speaker would have known of this. But after it did become part > >> of Hebrew, yes, ordinary speakers would notice. Anyone who used the > >> wrong variant would have sounded either 'wrong' or 'foreign', just like > >> in languages today that have the same phenomenon. > >> > >> This brings us back to a point often made: the Hebrew we have in the > >> Masoretic texts represents the way Hebrew was chanted in the second half > >> of the 1st millennium CE. As part of the tradition of Hebrew, it is > >> part of the evidence of how Hebrew was spoken in the 1st or 2nd > >> millennium BCE, but it is not, nor was it meant to be, a trascription of > >> how Moses, David or Ezra pronounced Hebrew. > >> > >> Kevin Riley > >> > >> On 5/11/2010 1:27 AM, fred burlingame wrote: > >> > that make life fun ... > >> > > >> > and so, in numbers 31:23 we have three instances of the hebrew word > באש > >> > occurring, but we have pronunciation differing; "ya-vo ... va-esh;" > >> > "ta-ah-vi-ru ... va-esh;" and "ya-vo ... ba-esh." > >> > > >> > Is there some rule or reason to "dagesh" for "ba-esh" only once of > three > >> > instances? > >> > > >> > Would the average 12th century b.c., shepherd or farmer practiced (or > >> > even > >> > known about) such subtle differences in his every day communications? > >> > > >> > Thanks for your help. > >> > > >> > regards, > >> > > >> > fred burlingame > >> > >> > >> Kevin is correct in general about bgdkpt and potentially sounding > >> foreigh or strange in not following the patterns. > >> > >> However, the example of Num 33.23 is special and relates to how > >> fast one is speaking. Normally, following a vowel the bet in 'with fire' > >> would have been pronounced as a fricative, (probably like the bilabial > >> 'b' in Habana [Havana in English] and later as a labiodental 'v)'. > >> However, if a speaker paused for half a moment the > >> bet was considered to be beginning a phrase and would be pronounced > >> as a stop 'b'. In the MT of Num 33, the third example is accented with > >> a 'disjunctive' accent before the bet. Thus, the pause would be heard > >> and reinforced by the stop 'b' continuing a new phrase unit. > >> > >> This illustrates the sub-phonemic status of the b/v alteration in > >> biblical/ > >> post-biblical times. If a speaker spoke the verse above quickly enough > >> then all of the bet's would have been fricatives. > >> > >> Randall Buth > > Randall Buth, PhD > www.biblicalulpan.org > [email protected] > Biblical Language Center > Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life > _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
