On Jun 3, 2013, at 11:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> From: "Rolf" <[email protected]>
> Date: June 3, 2013 2:20:12 AM CDT
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] G.Gertoux and the Name...
>
>
> Dear Jonathan,
>
> I have an explanation that differs from yours. The kaf is the first letter of
> the syllable, and because it has no preceding vowel, it should have had a
> dagesh and have been a stop, according to Masoretic rules. But it is
> fricative because other forms of MLK have a vowel before the kaf. Therefore,
> when Masoretic rules are violated, and we find a fricative begadkefat, which
> should have been a stop, this is often a signal that something is lacking
> that previously was there—here a vowel.
>
sure, but I think its new environment has to play a role as well. In this case
the fact that the lamed is a continuant encourages the speaker to keep the
fricative kaf. To confirm this I need to see some examples where the middle
consonant is a stop. But my main point is that it is first a deep structure
phenomena then by observation it became a masoretic rule.
>
> The vocalization of the four consonants YHWH leads to one closed syllable,
> YEH, and one open syllable, WA. A shewa in a closed syllable violates the
> rules of the Masoretes, Therefore, when it occurs, it may signal that
> something is lacking that previously was there. And this "something"
> naturally was a vowel after he. This would lead to three open syllables
> YE-H+vowel-WA.
>
Yes I agree. In fact Nehemiah points out that on two occasions the holem is
included. He believes this to be an early scribal slip.
> The position of Nehemiah Gordon may or may not be true; in my view, his
> arguments are not convincing. We do not know the real pronunciation of YHWH,
> but the clues we have, based on theophoric names, and corroborated by
> Akkadian transcriptions of Hebrew names, are that YHWH had three syllables,
> that the first was YE, and the last was WA, or WE (segol), and that the
> middle vowel was O or U. There is absolutely no ancient Hebrew evidence in
> favor of the two-syllabic YAHWEH.
>
Agreed. I have never liked the YAHWEH argument; it just seems too ad hoc. I
would point out that Nehemiah adds to his argument that names do not follow
vowel grammar, but instead generally work on a similarity principle, like
Manasseh with "forget", and Ephraim with "fruitful". He makes a good point
that we have no reason to force a sentence grammar on the tetragrammaton.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Rolf Furuli
> Stavern
> Norway
Best Regards to you too,
Jonathan Mohler
Baptist Bible Graduate School
Springfield, Missouri, U.S.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
