Here's an item from the Library of Congress catalog: Schleisner, Uriel. Keshe-Elohim ṿe-Yaḥṿeh nifgeshu / Uriʼel Shlaisner. <https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/holdingsInfo?searchId=17282&recCount=25&recPointer=4&bibId=11841803> Kefar Ṿeradim : Hotsaʼat Uriʼel--adam ṿe-ṭekhnologyah, [1999] BS1235.2 .S337 1999 Hebr
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Freedman, Vanessa <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree number 2 is the best option. I’d like to see some examples of > number 4. > > > > Best wishes > > > > Vanessa > > > > Vanessa Freedman > > Subject Liaison Librarian: Hebrew & Jewish Studies and Information Studies > > UCL Library Services > > University College London > > Gower Street > > London WC1E 6BT > > > > Tel (Mon, Thu, Fri): +44 (0)20 7679 2598 <+44%2020%207679%202598> > (Internal ext. 32598) > > Tel (Tue, Wed): +44 (0)20 7679 4405 <+44%2020%207679%204405> (Internal > ext. 34405) > > Fax: +44 (0) 20 7679 7373 <+44%2020%207679%207373> > > E-mail: [email protected] > > Twitter: @UCLHJSLibrary @vrfreedman > > Website: www.ucl.ac.uk/library > > > > **Please remember the environment and only print this if necessary** > > > > [image: UCL_Open_Access_banner] > <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/library/open-access/deposit> > > > > *From:* Heb-naco [mailto:[email protected]. > edu] *On Behalf Of *Dickel, Geraldine > *Sent:* 14 July 2017 20:04 > *To:* '[email protected]' <[email protected] > state.edu> > > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > Hi Jasmin and Haim, and other colleagues, > > > > I am also in favor of number 2 and agree that that option makes the most > sense. We would be Romanizing according to the vowels and disregarding the > consonants, if the intent of the vowels is to give Adonai or Elohim. The > consonants would be present in the Hebrew 245 field, and we can add as many > 246 fields as we think are necessary to provide access. > > > > The “modern” vocalization (number 4) is from an email from Joan. It would > be the tetragrammaton with a patah and a segol vowel to give Yahṿeh ( > יַהְוֶה), (in English, Yahweh), which is how academic biblical scholars > think that the divine name was pronounced. Number 4 goes along with number > 1, i.e., we give priority in Romanizing the tetragrammaton to the vowels, > but in the case of the “modern” vocalization, the vowels and the consonants > would be consistent with the intended pronunciation. > > > > The main reason that I included number 1 was in case there are any > religious objections to writing out fully Adonai or Elohim, or in the case > of the “modern” vocalization, to writing out Yahṿeh. > > > > I can’t remember seeing a title with a Romanized tetragrammaton, so it > would be nice to have some examples, just to see what sort of vowels exist. > > > > Best, > > Jerry Anne > > > > *From:* Shinohara, Jasmin [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Friday, July 14, 2017 11:27 AM > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <[email protected]>; Dickel, > Geraldine <[email protected]> > *Subject:* RE: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > My comments below in green. Thanks, Jasmin > > > > *From:* Heb-naco [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Dickel, Geraldine > *Sent:* Friday, July 14, 2017 10:19 AM > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > Dear colleagues, > > > > It seems to me that we are in agreement that the unvocalized > tetragrammaton should be Romanized in the 245 field as YHṾH. For a > vocalized tetragrammaton, we have several suggestions or options. To > summarize: > > > > 1. Romanize as YHṾH, i.e. follow the consonants and ignore the > vowels in the 245. Perhaps add a 500 note to say something like: > tetragrammaton is vocalized as ______. (A library that prefers to use > variations on words for the deity could do so in a 500 note, e.g., Elokim > instead of Elohim.) > > If vowels are supplied, they should not be ignored; that’s not the > author’s intent. > > 2. If the vowels are the vowels for Adonai or Elohim, Romanize as > Adonai or Elohim, i.e., follow the vowels and ignore the consonants. > > Makes most sense (with an added title access point for the title with the > YHṾH form and possibly other forms, depending on context). > > 3. If the vowels are the vowels for Adonai or Elohim, Romanize as > Yehoṿah, i.e., follow the vowels and the consonants. > > Doesn’t make any sense; if one follows both vowels and consonants, the > romanization would be Yahovai or Yehovi, neither of which is in any use. > > 4. If it is a modern vocalization, Romanize as Yahṿeh, i.e. follow > the vowels and consonants. > > What’s a “modern” vocalization??? > > > > I think that, until we have more time to consider the question and perhaps > collect some examples, we might need to deal with vocalized tetragrammatons > on a case by case basis. > > > > Best wishes, > > Jerry Anne > > > > *From:* Heb-naco [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Yossi Galron > *Sent:* Friday, July 07, 2017 3:11 PM > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > We, back in the Holy Land, secular Sabras pronounced the All Mighty's > name YHVH as Yehovah. > > > > If our teacher was from a religious background he would correct us and > say: Adonai. If he would come from a more orthodox background, he would > correct us to Ha-Shem. > > When we read the Shma we would say Adonai. > > In any case, I am for YHVH and an appropriate 246 for variants. > > > > > > > > On Jul 7, 2017 8:27 AM, "Freedman, Vanessa" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I agree with Jasmin. I can’t imagine anyone would read (or search for) the > Tetragrammaton (even if vocalised) as ‘Yehovah’ > > > > Vanessa > > > > Vanessa Freedman > > Subject Liaison Librarian: Hebrew & Jewish Studies and Information Studies > > UCL Library Services > > University College London > > Gower Street > > London WC1E 6BT > > > > Tel (Mon, Thu, Fri): +44 (0)20 7679 2598 <+44%2020%207679%202598> > (Internal ext. 32598) > > Tel (Tue, Wed): +44 (0)20 7679 4405 <+44%2020%207679%204405> (Internal > ext. 34405) > > Fax: +44 (0) 20 7679 7373 <+44%2020%207679%207373> > > E-mail: [email protected] > > Twitter: @UCLHJSLibrary @vrfreedman > > Website: www.ucl.ac.uk/library > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ucl.ac.uk_library&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=Yq03sEwFiLkQcPqmuNfJcAbQbJB4H8l0cQrqmkpmtwE&s=N2i3H4YzmIxEQme4pheeTnibq-6D0_XkHVY56D8bbj8&e=> > > > > **Please remember the environment and only print this if necessary** > > > > > > > > *From:* Heb-naco [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of > *Shinohara, > Jasmin > *Sent:* 06 July 2017 16:28 > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > I don’t think that formulation is clear, Jerry Anne. Typically, where > vowels are supplied, it is to indicate whether the Name should be > pronounced as Ado-nai or as Elokim. To say “it should be Romanized with the > vowels as given in the source” may imply using the YHṾH consonants with > the addition of the supplied vowels, but those consonants are not > (typically) intended to be pronounced. I think if the vocalization is > given, that form (Ado-nai or Elokim) should be in the 245 with the addition > of YHṾH in the 246. > > > > My half cent. Jasmin > > > > *From:* Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces+jshino=pobox.upenn.edu@lists. > osu.edu <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Dickel, Geraldine > *Sent:* Thursday, July 06, 2017 11:17 AM > *To:* [email protected]; Hebrew Name Authority Funnel > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > Good question. If the vowels are supplied should the Tetragrammaton be > Romanized with the vowels? > > > > Should the HCM say: The unvocalized Tetragrammaton, יהוה, should be > Romanized YHṾH. If the Tetragrammaton is vocalized it should be Romanized > with the vowels as given in the source.” > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Best, > > Jerry Anne > > > > *From:* Robert M. TALBOTT [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Thursday, July 06, 2017 10:58 AM > *To:* Dickel, Geraldine <[email protected]>; Hebrew Name > Authority Funnel <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > Well, it's been lost in the dust up, but what about cases where vowels are > supplied? Or is the Tetragrammaton always YHVH in all instances, > euphemistic added entries not with standing? > > > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Dickel, Geraldine < > [email protected]> wrote: > > I have added: “The Tetragrammaton, יהוה, should be Romanized YHṾH.” to > page 32 of the HCM under Names of the Divinity. Jasmin has also added it > to the Romanization FAQ document on the AJL RAS Cataloging wiki. > > > > Thank you, > > Jerry Anne > > > > *From:* Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces+geraldine.dickel=yale.edu@ > lists.osu.edu] *On Behalf Of *Robert M. TALBOTT > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 05, 2017 5:31 PM > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > Thanks folks. > > > > Is there any chance we could get a transliteration advisory covering this > included in the HCM? 'Twould be quite handy for those few times it actually > happens. > > > > B > > > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Judith Zupnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > I agree with Joan. > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Heb-naco <[email protected]> on > behalf of Joan Biella <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 5, 2017 1:39 PM > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > I agree with Aaron, and would advocate for YHVH (subscript dot under V) as > the least controversial way to deal with this situation. > > Joan > > > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Kuperman, Aaron <[email protected]> wrote: > > Assuming there are no nekudot, would it not be presumptuous for a > cataloger to claim to know how it would be pronounced. > > > > Aaron Kuperman, LC Law Cataloging Section. > > This is not an official communication from my employer > > > > > > *From:* Heb-naco [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Robert M. TALBOTT > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 05, 2017 3:49 PM > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel > *Subject:* [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh > > > > Hi folks: > > > > I'm cataloging a book right now that has the tetragrammaton in the title. > > > > 1) YHVH? This is what the record has > > 2) Yehovah? My preference > > 3) Yahveh? As good as any other > > 4) Or should we use a euphemism,e.g ha-Shem? > > > > I'm not invested in this one and am agnostic as to the outcome, but which > form is preferred? The euphemism 'ha-Shem" and "Adonai" are already slotted > in the record as added title entries. > > > > B > -- > > Bob Talbott > > Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger > > UC Berkeley > > 250 Moffitt > > Berkeley, CA 94720 > > I'm just mad about Saffron > > > _______________________________________________ > Heb-naco mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.osu.edu_mailman_listinfo_heb-2Dnaco&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=8Bhpkp2UFGvtGlCIxFR2NMgooC9g5DAB6NZFqQpIiqI&s=bvQ43k4dfpfsvm3wGujVC6kPUOR8YKBlAmzlglfsMs8&e=> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Heb-naco mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.osu.edu_mailman_listinfo_heb-2Dnaco&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=8Bhpkp2UFGvtGlCIxFR2NMgooC9g5DAB6NZFqQpIiqI&s=bvQ43k4dfpfsvm3wGujVC6kPUOR8YKBlAmzlglfsMs8&e=> > > > > > > -- > > Bob Talbott > > Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger > > UC Berkeley > > 250 Moffitt > > Berkeley, CA 94720 > > I'm just mad about Saffron > > > > > > -- > > Bob Talbott > > Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger > > UC Berkeley > > 250 Moffitt > > Berkeley, CA 94720 > > I'm just mad about Saffron > > > _______________________________________________ > Heb-naco mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.osu.edu_mailman_listinfo_heb-2Dnaco&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=Yq03sEwFiLkQcPqmuNfJcAbQbJB4H8l0cQrqmkpmtwE&s=B5AKy3Boa85HYPZHJjgctPunf3Qx2CELEZdO_fWveAg&e=> > > > _______________________________________________ > Heb-naco mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco > >
_______________________________________________ Heb-naco mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
