Jump to content

syllabification of Hebrew


Bielikov
 Share

Recommended Posts

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
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!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

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 by Bielikov
Add comment
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

D9C097A3-EA73-4473-A853-523D77F322CF.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

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 by c. stirling bartholomew
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...