|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1152 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Was there ever a J sound in Hebrew? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1152 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
Whenever it is stated that there is no J sound in the Hebrew, there's a fact that the Scribes, doctorates and the hebraists, have been omitting.
1st. The statement can only be applied to Modern Hebrew.2nd. Paleo Hebrew differs from the Modern. No evidence is found that the Hebrew consonant phonemes remained the same from two thousand years ago. 3rd. In the book of Genesis there are evidences of the existence of a consonant phoneme Jewd in the Ancient Hebrew Language, for the consonant sounds of the new languages derived from the confounding of the phonemes which had already existed in the first and perfect ancient Hebrew language. - In the time that the whole earth had one Language and the same words, some men moved from the east and settled themselves in a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. The words: some men, does not include any and all men that were on the earth. - Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : to include the message subtitle Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : all the principal languages Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : derived Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : improve text and spacements Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : updating
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
even without the tower of babel you've a point.
ancient languages are different from their modern counterparts. Take for example Old English. It was spoken before William of Normandy (the Conqueror) came and mixed french into the language. It has a whole three different letters, all represeting a sound--which sounds we still have, but . . . The language is unintelligible to those of us who haven't studied Old English extensively--such as me. http://www.kami.demon.co.uk/gesithas/readings/deor_oe.htmljust click on the first letter of each verse to hear it spoken. but you might need some new software, especially if you're lacking real player. the sight has several old english audio clips. pretty cool sounding if you ask me. ABE: upon rereading this, it seems as if you can intepret the sentence before the link as saying that I have studied Old English extensively. which is not the case--I've studied it in my english class in high school for the sole purpose of examining how they wrote their poems. The stuff is unitelligible to me for the most part also. Edited by kuresu, : No reason given. All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Its possible that there was once a "J" sound in orignal Hebrew. As far as anyone can tell, Sumerian was the original language of the ancients. The sumerian lexicon is difficult to track down because even it synthesized a bit from Akkadian influence. I guess it really doesn't mater either way. Its an interesting topic though, nonetheless.
“It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
depends on which ancients you refer to, NJ.
The roman and greek languages share a different root than does hebrew. latin and greek are from the proto-indo-european language family, as are all the germanic, slavic, romance, and even a few Indian (the continent, not our Indians). hebrew is semetic, and as such shares the same root as arabic. also, the egyptian language, I don't think, is based off of the sumerian. the ancient chinese have yet another root language. so, saying the ancients had the sumerian language root is false. saying that the semetic languages might still be false, but at least it's not a blanket statement covering every ancient civilization on earth. All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
The most comprehensive study that I've seen on the web concerning ethnography and philology can be found here. As far as my own personal beliefs, I believe that Sumerian is likely the progeny of all language, with Akkadian, Sanskrit, Greek, and possibly some defunct languages as the direct offshoots as far as the ancient languages go.
Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : edit to add Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : typo Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : fix tags “It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
Interesting. I clicked on english. It told me every single damn country english is spoken in. Not where english is from, not its roots, not how it relates to others.
If I could only scan my American Heritage dictionary's back pages, particularly with the graph showing the indo-european language.The oldest language we know of, and guess what--without any written parts of it, they've figured the damn language out. It's prununciation, what the words mean, the grammer. Oh, and it's a lot older than sumerian. It's older than all of civiliazation--even from before written history. All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1152 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
Kuresu,
Thank you for the encouragements. - Eternal words - For the sake of my Name I did what keeps it from being polluted by the abominations, faiths and beliefs of the earth. I AM [JEHAVEH] who makes known the KADHISH [HOLINESS] of my Name. Once it is said I AM who makes known my Name, the understanding is given that it is not up to the beasts [spiritually imposed doctrines] from what has been called religion and theology to make known the pronunciation of the Name that remains eternally. - If one understands that the Eternal and Celestial actually did that, then it is reasonable to attest that the correct pronunciation of the Ancient Hebrew Tetragram has been sealed as a hidden treasure in a field, and kept from being polluted by today’s scribes and everything that is called religion and beasts [spiritual doctrinal powers] upon the earth. - And if the consonant sounds of the pronunciation JEHAVEH had to remain sanctified/separated, as a hidden treasure in a field,from being polluted by today's scribes, Isn’t it too coincidental that from all the principal languages the Modern Hebrew is the only one that does not pronounce the consonant sound of a J? -
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1344 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
And if the consonant sounds of the pronunciation JEHAVEH there are no consonants in god's name. rather, there are four semi-vowels. you are arguing, effectively, whether yud could ever have been pronounced with a "jah" sound. it's a little tricky to say for certain, but i can tell you: almost certainly not. well before hebrew, possibly the first phonetic alef-bet was phoenician. in fact, the very word "phonetic" comes from "phoenicia." from phoenician alef-bet spawns several languages we're quite familiar with:
further, since hebrew was originally adapted from certain phonetic sumerian cuneiform scripts, before the modern aramaic alef-bet, it's quite likely this sound was absent in sumeria as well. now, let's look at the name of god for a second: yud-hey-vav-hey. the name itself is a conjugation of a hebrew word: that lamed-hey-yud-vav-taf. shall we try to figure that out using your pronounciation scheme? sounds like it'd be "lehejavet." which, really, really, sounds like gibberish. it's pronounced "l'hiot." that's "leh-he-ote," with the first syllable very short. while most consonants do have vowels added to them, not all of them are pronounced -- especially when there are semi-vowels in the word. and not all big hebrew letters are consonants. yud, vav, and sometimes hey are semivowels. alef and ayin are (full) vowels. so, — is pronouced "leh," not "lehe." is pronounced "he," not "hej," and not "heje." the yud must take a soft sound in the middle of the word. is pronounce "yo," not "jo," not "jav," and not "java." like the yud, the vav takes a soft sound in the middle of the word. (there are exceptions to this rule, but they are few and far between. normally, a "va" sound in the middle of the word is made by a softened bet, not a vav). on the end of a word is pronounced "oat," and is the common feminine pluralization, used here in a rare infinitive form. it's not "vat," "vet," or "vata." as a whole, the word is "l'hyot," to be. the present tense and past tense of the word is , hayah. though the present is never used. rather, it's implied in the language. that's "hayah" not "hajah." now, in hebrew, when we change conjugations of words, typicalled we add a vav "oh" sound in different places, depending on what we're saying, and what the subject of the sentance is. one particular conjugation of moves the yud out front, and sticks the "oh" sound in the middle, like this: which should look familiar. so, the makes a "yah" sound, the makes a "ho" or a "hu" sound (easier to say), and the last makes an "eh" or and "ah" sound (probably an "eh"). why? because that's the way semi-vowels work. how do i know it's probably a "yah" sound and not a "jah" sound? because the harder versions of that soft yud in the middle of l'hyot is "yah," like the "yah" in hayah. so god's name can acceptable be pronounced "yahueh" ("yahu" being a common root in hebrew) and probably not "yahoah." now, let's examine something sneaky here, and tie the two arguments here together. how can i say for certain that god's name never had a "jah" sound in it? the "jah" sound does not exist in hebrew (and cannot exist in this word, phonetically), *AND* god's name comes from a hebrew word. which, again, should not be a startling conclusion for a book written in hebrew. if a "j" sound existed in other languages, and god chose to reveal himself to other people, that's fine. but his name in that language would likely come from the same word in that language, and would not be but something else entirely. if hebrew is a corrupted version of the original (babel-onian) language, the "jah" sound would still not be in the name, because it would not be in the middle the cognate of hayah. so no, there was probably never a "j" sound in hebrew, and even if there was, it wasn't in this word.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1344 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Take for example Old English. not a good example. modern english has deviated from old english far more than modern hebrew has deviated from biblical hebrew. the difference is that english has been spoken ever since before beowulf was written, continuously, until now. if we take a look at shakespearean english, it's almost contemporary. technically, what we speak is a dialect of shakespearean english. we can read shakespeare (even in the original script, slightly different alphabet) and the kjv and still understand them with a high degree of ease and accuracy. go back to chaucer, and it's a little more difficult. tricky, but possible with some work. back to beowulf, and it's basically a different language. now, compare that to hebrew. biblical hebrew was written for a few hundred years, during the time of the old testament's authorship (be definition). sometime during that period, aramaic became not only the vernacular, but a few books of the bible were written in it. the biblical hebrew script is derived from aramaic, in fact. before that, the books were written in paleohebrew. and guess what, they were the same words, in a different font. the problem is that once aramaic became the common language, hebrew for all intents and purposes died. the only people who spoke it were the priests, and probably just for reading the bible, until the septuagint came along. the translation to greek was issued because hebrew had basically become a dead language. the next time hebrew appears as a spoken and evolving language, as opposed to solid tradition, is 1948. that's 2200 years with no one adding words, changing pronounciation, messing with grammar and spelling, adding characters, etc. that's key one. technically, eliazer ben yehuda, the man responsible for modern hebrew, died before then, but until the formation of the state of israel, his work was generally considered blasphemous. hebrew was a traditional and sacred language, and one you did not mess with. that's key number two. third key is that, while there were medieval and regional dialects of hebrew, modern hebrew was taken, for all intents and purposes, directly from the bible. the only gigantic noticeable change is sentance order, and you figure that about somewhere in genesis 1:1. so, let's use some proper english analogies: the change from biblical hebrew to modern hebrew is about as dramatic as the change from shakespearean english to contemporary english, if not less dramatic in some books. if go read the books in aramaic, we find that all the words are pretty much exact cognates to modern hebrew, with slightly different grammar. so aramaic to modern hebrew is sort of like chaucer to modern english. if you speak hebrew, and go talk to someone who speaks aramaic (certain groups in jerusalem still do), you'll pick up about as much as you or i would pick up from chaucer. probably 50-75% of the words. what about an analogy for old-english? phoenician. it's not a semitic language, exactly. similar, OE is norse in origin, not germanic like modern english. but it uses the same alef-bet, and probably a few of the same words. as for paleohebrew? essentially early biblical hebrew, with the phoenician script. Edited by arachnophilia, : typo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
hey arach, are you sure that the phonecian language is the root of greek?
the alphabet (or as you put it, the alef-bet) is definetely based off of their concept of having one symbol for one sound. but language wise, there's a lot of research that shows a different root. Germanic languages share the same root as latin, but germanic did not come from latin. I really wich I had my dictionary right now. maybe this weekend I can get a hold of it, and give the family tree of indo-european (heh-you're a peein' ) languages. And as a hint--the semetic languages, if I recall correctly, do not belong in the tree--they're in a totally different tree. you are right--german doesn't have a "j" sound. neither does swedish, so I'm fairly confident that danish and norwegian don't either.spanish--the sound as we know i in english isn't there. but we must have picked it up from somewhere. All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
I won't contend with you on your hebrew stuff--I don't know any of it grammer and whatnot wise.
but, it will contend with you on old english. it is germanic in it's root. as are the scandinavian lanuages. but, OE did not come from them. of course, I may be taking that back after this weekend, seeing as how I've got a dictionary with a very nice thesis on the history of language, particularly english. Not to mention a wonderful chart. All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1344 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
hey arach, are you sure that the phonecian language is the root of greek? language, no, alphabet, absolutely. see the chart on the wikipedia page. similarly,
quote: ancient greeks and phoenicians often traded and sometimes warred.
Germanic languages share the same root as latin, but germanic did not come from latin. language? no. script, yes. sorry if i was being confusing. the germanic alphabet comes from the latin alphabet, which comes from the greek alphabet, which comes from the phoenician alphabet.
And as a hint--the semetic languages, if I recall correctly, do not belong in the tree--they're in a totally different tree. yes, they are, of course, but their common ancestor is the phoenician alphabet.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1344 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
but, it will contend with you on old english. it is germanic in it's root. as are the scandinavian lanuages. are they? hm. ok. i was under the impression norse was a separate group. ah well.
but, OE did not come from them. uh, this one i'm also pretty sure about. my father happens to be fairly fluent in old english (don't ask me, he's as crazy as i am). he relates to me that the angles and the saxons were originally norse people, who invaded the british isles a long time ago. (beowulf is, btw, a norse legend, regarding someone from apparently what would be denmark or sweden today.) if we compare OE to the native languages of area, various forms of gælic and welsh, its quite different. OE shares remarkable similarity to old norse, and suprisingly, modern icelandic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
okay, so you were saying the alphabets shared a common root. which is true.
yeah, that's were I was getting confused. It almost sounded as if you were saying the languages were rooted, especially on the disertation of the lack of a j sound in five generations. I interpreted that as more a language than alphabet thing.hence, my confusion. okay. All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024