syllabification of Hebrew

[Bielikov]

Does accordance offer a syllabification of the Hebrew text, either as a line in the interlinears, or in some other way?

[Kristin]

Hi @Bielikov,

I am not 100% sure if I am understanding your goal correctly, but if I am, and you are just looking for a clear way of knowing the syllable breaks of a word, just make sure you have the Hebrew pointing turned on. Hebrew only has one vowel per syllable, so break each syllable at each vowel, with the vowel ending each syllable. I hope this helps some.

Kristin

[Bielikov]

Hi Kristin, thanks for your comments. It turns out that I had this conversation with Helen three years ago. I found it last night after I sent this request. Very interesting thing is that I have discovered that there are two schools of thought when it comes to syllabification. A very straight forward one where even Shewas are used as vowels (Practico et al, Christo et al) vs. a different school where Shewas are attached to another syllable, but never constitute a syllable on their own (Joüon et al, Fuller et al, Logos Lexham Hebrew Interlinear or LHI). While I use all of these grammars to study in general, I have been using the Joüon, Fuller and LHI approach to syllabization. And now I am working mostly with the Fuller - Choi textbook (it is wonderful, by the way). So, the long answer is that depending on the grammar you use, syllabization can be more complex and functions under different rules. Thanks for trying to help me, anyway. Oh, and there is a very specific issue with a word on Isaiah 2, whose syllabization is under debate.

[Kristin]

Hi @Bielikov,

Thank you for clarifying, and that is really interesting about the school of thought. I had not realized it was debated and had only been exposed to the way I had described. While I did not know there are syllable debates, I do know sometimes the meaning of verses can change if the vowels are wrong. If you do not mind, what word/verse in Is 2 are you referring to?

[Lindsey Askin]

On 5/7/2022 at 10:32 PM, Bielikov said:

Oh, and there is a very specific issue with a word on Isaiah 2, whose syllabization is under debate.

I am curious. Please say more!

[Bielikov]

Difficult syllabification question. יִֽשְׁתַּחֲו֔וּ This is from Isaiah 2:8, if you have trouble seeing the details. The word in Logos is syllabized as if the TAV was a dagesh forte (even though we know that a Dagesh Forte must be preceded by a vowel). Is that Metheg before the Shewa in the Shin playing some sort of role beside making the Shin a vocal Shewa? Yishet - ta - havu. Sorry for my creative transliteration. Thanks.

 

NOTE: I have never seen Logos make a mistake in their transliteration syllabification, but will write to make sure they check it. 

Edited May 19, 2022 by Bielikov
Add comment

[Robert Holmstedt]

That cannot be a dagesh forte since it would defy the morphology of the form. The presence of dagesh forte (which is not "doubling" in a simple sense but the lengthening of the consonant as well as the use of the plosive reflex of the phoneme) is not really about whether a vowel precedes it, but about the morphological patterns. However one parses it, as a Hištap̄ʿel from √חוה (see HALOT; my vote, based on Ugaritic) or a Hiṯpalʿel from √שׁחה (see DCH), the prefix syllable is yiš- (here, if a Hitp., reflecting the metathesis of the ת and שׁ), followed by the beginning of a new syllable, -ta, then another syllable -ḥă, and finally -wū. 

[Bielikov]

Robert, are you familiar with the approach that Logos takes to syllabification? If so, did they make a mistake here? 

[Robert Holmstedt]

Dear Bielikov,

I don't use Logos much and don't think I've ever looked at their transliteration, but I am quite aware of issues of syllabification for Hebrew and there is no way that what they've done in that word is correct. 

 

[Bielikov]

Thanks. I sent it in last night to have it checked. Thanks for confirming. I love Logos syllabification and this is the first time I find something that seems wrong. 

[Iconoclaste]

Perhaps the gaya confused Logos's transliteration?

 

Btw, a good way to check syllabification is to listen to Shlomo Bertonov or Abraham Shmuelof's recordings. The latter are free online: https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/ptmp3prq.htm

[c. stirling bartholomew]

Reading the comments and straining to follow the argument, I venture a guess that one error in the Logos transliteration/syllabification is the sequence "t-t" in yishet-ta-hawu. I suspect that isn't the only issue. 

 

Postscript: Didn't find this error viewing Isaiah 2:8 in HMT-T running Accord 9.6.8 export as transliteration yištaḥᵃwû or instant details yishtachawu. 

Quote

 

However one parses it, as a Hištap̄ʿel from √חוה (see HALOT; my vote, based on Ugaritic) or a Hiṯpalʿel from √שׁחה

 

 

I notice the editors of HMT-T(1) changed their minds on this from Hiṯpalʿel to Hištap̄ʿel sometime between 1.1 1994 and 3.5 2001.

 

(1) Hebrew Masoretic Text Groves-Wheeler Westminster Hebrew Morphology (Release 3.5) ©1991, 1994,1999, 2001 Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  USA. All rights reserved. Text used by permission of the United Bible Society, based on the Michigan-Claremont-Westminster machine-readable text.  All rights reserved. Version 3.1   

 

 

Edited May 29, 2022 by c. stirling bartholomew