Yigal Levin and George Athas:
 
It would be greatly appreciated if one of you would be so kind as to set forth 
the mainstream theory or theories as to why there’s a vav in the name of 
Jacob’s #2 son:  $M(-WN.  No vowels were recorded in the earliest Hebrew.  So 
why is that vav there?  My own controversial theory is that not only is that 
vav a true consonant that was there from day #1 [in the Late Bronze Age], but 
also that it’s a non-Semitic consonant, being the standard Hurrian genitive 
case marker, which was put there by the original early Hebrew author so that 
the ending of this name would “sound non-Semitic”.  The text portrays Leah as 
always living in Naharim in eastern Syria in the Patriarchal Age, and Leah as 
naming her sons.  Though Leah’s primary language was west Semitic/pre-Hebrew 
[in my opinion], if the text is old and has even a modicum of historical 
accuracy, out there in Naharim Leah would have heard Hurrian suffixes being 
spoken by her neighbors all day long.  Dr. Fournet has rejected my theory of 
the case, but has not come up with an alternative theory to explain the 
presence of the vav in that name.
 
What is the standard theory as to this?  I have done some looking, but have 
found nothing.  The only thing I can think of is that some scholars might claim 
that a 1st millennium BCE editor added in a lot of vavs as plene spelling 
updates, and for some unaccountable reason did more of that kind of thing 
regarding vav nun suffixes for common words and personal names in the 
Patriarchal narratives than anywhere else in the Bible, including adding vavs 
to the Hebrew names $M(-WN, ZBL-WN [though there are two other spellings of 
that name in the Bible], GR$-WN and )L-WN.  Yet I have not found anyone in 
print actually saying that.
 
If a student of yours asked you why there’s a vav in the ancient name $M(-WN, 
what would be the standard reply?  The plausibility of my controversial 
non-Semitic theory of the case is likely inversely proportional to the 
plausibility [or near certainty?] of the standard, all west Semitic theory of 
the case.  Why is that vav in the name $M(-WN?
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

Reply via email to