Kevin Riley: You wrote: “You might notice, just in passing, that all the Semitic languages except Akkadian start words with a consonant. Therefore only Akkadian has an initial A. Does that not suggest, especially when you take into account everything known about Akkadian, that perhaps there was no initial 'true vowel A', but in fact an ) ?” That seems to make sense, but if you are right about that, then how do you explain the “vanishing yod” phenomenon? I had tentatively thought that perhaps a true vowel A could be represented in Hebrew alternatively by )Y or just ). But if you’re saying that the aleph we see in these words is a true consonantal aleph, then how do you explain the fact that most of these words, although their full form begins )YL, can alternatively be spelled in shortened form beginning with )L? That’s what I’m struggling with. HALOT gives at least 7 examples of that widespread phenomenon regarding these words: (1) p. 48: “I )L > I )YL ram, tyrant” (2) p. 48: “II )L > II )YL big tree” (3) p. 48: “III )L > III )YL pillar” (4) p. 51: )LH is a “unitary noun from II )YL” (5) p. 54: Regarding )LWN at Judges 4: 11, “MSS )YLWN”. That is to say, many manuscripts have an interior yod, though the Masoretic text does not. (6) p. 40: The words for both “ram” and “deer” (or “stag”) in Hebrew are )YL. But the Ugaritic cognate for “ram” is il, with no yod whatsoever, whereas the Ugaritic cognate for “deer” is ’yl, with a yod, and in Syriac “deer” is ’iyyala, with a consonantal yod. (7) p. 41: )WLM vs. )LM vs. )LM: “orthography varies”. Why does that interior yod seem to be optional in so many of these cases? My main problem is not so much with the initial aleph, but rather is how to explain the “vanishing yod” in so many of these words. Jim Stinehart Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
