Tiberian Hebrew

From Textus Receptus

Revision as of 06:20, 9 July 2011

Closeup of Aleppo Codex, Joshua 1:1

See also Tiberian vocalization

Tiberian Hebrew is the extinct canonical pronunciation of the Hebrew Bible or Tanakh and related documents in the Roman Empire. This traditional medieval pronunciation was committed to writing by Masoretic scholars based in the Jewish community of Tiberias 750-950 AD, in the form of the Tiberian vocalization. This written form employed diacritics added to the Hebrew letters: vowel signs and consonant diacritics (nequdot) and the so-called accents (two related systems of cantillation signs or te'amim), which together with the marginal notes (masora magna and masora parva) make up the Tiberian apparatus. (Though the written vowels and accents only came into use ca. 750 CE, the oral tradition they reflect is many centuries older, with ancient roots.)

Sources

Page from Aleppo Codex, Deuteronomy

The usual Hebrew Grammar Books do not teach Tiberian Hebrew as described by the early grammarians. The prevalent view in some of these grammars is the use of David Qimchi's system of division of the graphic signs into "short" and "long" vowels. The values assigned to the Tiberian vowel signs reveals a Sephardi tradition of pronunciation (the dual quality of qames (אָ) as /a/, /o/; the pronunciation of simple sheva (אְ) as /ɛ̆/).

The phonology of Tiberian Hebrew can be gleaned by the collation of various sources:

• The Aleppo Codex of the Bible (and other ancient manuscripts of the Tanakh, cited in the margins of early codices), which actually preserves direct evidence of the application of these rules in the Hebrew Bible in a graphic manner, e.g. the widespread use of chateph vowels where one would expect simple sheva, clarifying the color of the vowel thus pronounced under certain circumstances. Most prominent, the use of chateph chireq in five words under a consonant which follows a guttural vocalized with regular chireq, as described by Israel Yeivin. Even the anomalous use of the rafé sign over other letters which do not belong to בגדכפ"ת or א"ה.

• The explicit statements found in books of grammar near the 10th and 11th Centuries C.E., such as: The Sefer haQoloth of Moshe ben Asher (published by N. Allony), Diqduqé hata'amim of Aaron ben Moses ben Asher; the anonymous works entitled Horayath haQoré (G. Khan and Ilan Eldar attribute it to the Karaite Abu Alfaraj Harun), the Treatise on the Schwa (published by Kurt Levy from a Genizah fragment in 1936), and Ma'amar haschewa (published from Genizah material by Allony); the works of medieval Sephardi grammarians, such as Abraham Ibn Ezra, Judah ben David Hayyuj. In the last two, it is evident that the chain of transmission is already breaking down, or interpreted under the influence of their local tradition.

• Ancient manuscripts which preserve other similar dialects of Hebrew or Palestinian Aramaic, but vocalized in Tiberian signs in a "vulgar" manner, which reveal a phonetic spelling, rather than a phonemic spelling. This is the case of the so called "Pseudo-Ben Naphtali" or "Palestinian-Sephardi" vocalized manuscripts. These confirm some of the rules enumerated below, for example, the pronunciation of sheva as /ĭ/ before consonantal yod, as in /bĭji/ בְּיִ.

• Other vocalization traditions such as: the vocalization of the Land of Israel; and, to a lesser extent, the Babylonian vocalization. Each community (Palestinian, Tiberian, and Babylonian) developed systems of notation of pronunciation phenomena in each dialect, and some of them are common among these traditions. In one it is graphically represented, while in some other, we have to rely on other sources for explicit statements.

• The transcriptions of the Biblical text made by the members of the Karaite community into Arabic characters, and vocalized with Tiberian signs, help us get a glimpse of the pronunciation of Tiberian Hebrew. This is especially true with regards to syllable structure, and vowel length (which is marked in Arabic by matres lectionis, and the sign sukun).

• Various oral traditions, especially the oral tradition of Yemenite Hebrew pronunciation, and the Karaite tradition. Both have preserved old features which correspond to Tiberian tradition, such as the pronunciation of schewa according to its proximity to gutturals or yod.

Phonology

Consonants

Tiberian Hebrew has 22 consonantal phonemes represented by 22 letters. The Shin with dot on the left (שׂ) was pronounced the same as the letter Samekh. The letters בגדכפ"ת had two values each – plosive and fricative.

The most salient characteristics of the Tiberian Hebrew consonantal pronunciation are:

• Waw "ו" conjunctive was read, before פמ"ב, as אוּ ʔu/, rather than וֻ wu/ (as is the case in some eastern reading traditions).
• The threefold pronunciation of Resh "ר". Even though there is no agreement as to how it was pronounced, the rules of distribution of such pronunciation is given in Horayath haQoré:

a) "Normal" Resh ʀ/ pronounced thus (according to Eldar, as a uvular sound ʀ/) in all other instances (except for the circumstances described below). Example: אוֹר ʔoːʀ/

b) The "peculiar" resh r/ before or after Lamed or Nun, any of the three being vocalized with simple sheva; and Resh after Zayin, Daleth, Sin / Samekh, Taw, Tzadi, Teth, any of them punctuated with simple sheva. Example: יִשְׂרָאֵל /jisrɔːˈʲeːl/, עָרְלָה /ʕɔrˈlɔː/. Given the proximity of a dental consonant, it is likely that this form of resh was pronounced as an alveolar trill, like resh in Sephardi Hebrew.

c) There is still another pronunciation, affected by the addition of a dagesh in the Resh in certain words in the Bible, which indicates it was doubled /ʀː/. Example: הַרְּאִיתֶם /hɐʀːĭʔiːˈθɛːm/ As can be seen, this pronunciation has to do with the progressive increase in length of this consonant. It was preserved only by the population of Ma'azya which is in Tiberias.

• A possible threefold pronunciation of Taw. There are three words in the Torah, Prophets and Writings of which is said that "the Taw is pronounced harder than usual". It is said that this pronunciation was half way between the soft Taw /θ/ and the hard Taw /t/. Example: וַיְשִׂימֶהָ תֵּל /vɐjsiːˈmɛːhɔθ teːl/

Vowels

1. marginal

The vowel qualities /a e i ɔ o u/ have phonemic status: viz. אשָם הוא אשֹם אשַם (Leviticus 5:19) and אשֵם 'guilty', אִם 'when' and אֵם 'mother'.^[] /ɛ/ has phonemic value in final stressed position: רעֶה רעִי רעָה, מקנֶה מקנֵה, קנֶה קנָה קנֹה, but in other positions it may reflect loss of the opposition /a : i/.^[] By the Tiberian time, all short vowels in stressed syllables had lengthened, making vowel length allophonic.^[][] Vowels in open or stressed syllables had allophonic length (e.g. /a/ in יְרַחֵם, which was previously short).^[][]

the Tiberian tradition possesses three reduced (ultrashort, hatuf) vowels /ă ɔ̆ ɛ̆/ of which /ɛ̆/ has questionable phonemicity.^[][][] /ă/ under a non-guttural letter was pronounced as a ultrashort copy of the following vowel before a guttural, e.g. וּבָקְעָה [uvɔqɔ̆ˈʕɔ], and as [ĭ] preceding /j/, e.g. תְדֵמְּיוּ֫נִי [θăðammĭˈjuni], but was always pronounced as [ă] under gutturals, e.g. חֲיִי [ħăˈji].^[][]

Stress

Tiberian Hebrew has phonemic stress, e.g. בָּנוּ֫ /bɔˈnu/ 'they built' vs. בָּ֫נוּ /ˈbɔnu/ 'in us'; stress is most commonly ultimate, less commonly penultimate, and antipenultimate stress exists marginally, e.g. הָאֹ֫הֱלָה /hɔˈʔohɛ̆lɔ/ 'into the tent'.^[][]

Phonotactics

As described above, vowel length was dependent on syllable structure. Open syllables must take long or ultrashort vowels, stressed closed syllables take long vowels, and unstressed closed syllables take short vowels. Traditional Hebrew philology considers ultrashort vowels not to constitute syllable nuclei.

Orthography

See Also Hebrew alphabet Tiberian vocalization

The simple sheva sign changes its pronunciation depending on its position in the word (mobile/vocal or quiescent/zero), as well as due to its proximity to certain consonants.

In the examples given below, it has been preferred to show one found precisely in the Bible which represents each phenomenon in a graphic manner (i.e. a chateph vowel), although these rules still apply when there is only simple sheva (depending on the manuscript or edition used).

When the simple sheva appears in any of the following positions, it is regarded as mobile (na):

• At the beginning of a word. This includes the sheva (originally the first of the word) following the attached particles bi-,ki-,li- and u- and preceded by metheg (the vertical line placed to the left of the vowel sign, which stands for either secondary stress, or its lengthening). Examples: וּזֲהַב /ˌʔuːzɐ̆ˈhɐːv/ Genesis 2:12; בִּסֲבָךְ /ˈbiːsɐ̆vɔx/ Psalms 74:5. But is not pronounced if there is no metheg, that is, they form a closed syllable.

• The sheva following these three vowels /e/, /ɔ/, /o/, except for known types of closed syllables (and preceded or not, by metheg). Examples: נֵלֲכָה-נָּא /ˌneːlɐ̆xɔˈnːɔː/ Exodus 3:18; אֵלֲכָה נָּא /ˈʔeːlɐ̆xɔː ˈnɔː/ Exodus 4:18.

• The second of two adjacent shevas, when both appear under different consonants. Examples: אֶכְתֲּבֶנּוּ /ʔɛxtɐ̆ˈvɛːnːuː/ Jeremiah 31:33; וָאֶשְׁקֲלָה-לֹּו /vɔːʔɛʃqɐ̆lɔˈlːoː/ Jeremiah 32:9 (except for at the end of a word, אָמַרְתְּ /ɔːˈmɐːrt/).

• The sheva under the first of two identical consonants, preceded by metheg. Examples: בְּחַצֲצֹן /bɐ̆ˌћɐːsˤɐ̆ˈsˤoːn/ Genesis 14:17; צָלֲלוּ /sˤɔːlɐ̆ˈluː/ Exodus 15:10.

• The sheva under a consonant with dagesh forte or lene. Examples: סֻבֳּלוֹ /suɓbɔ̆ˈloː/ Isaiah 9:3; אֶשְׁתֳּלֶנּוּ /ʔɛʃtɐ̆ˈlɛːnːuː/ Ezekiel 17:23.

• The sheva under a consonant which expects gemination, but is not marked thus, for example, the one found under ר. And sometimes even מ when preceded by the article. Examples: מְבָרֲכֶיךָ /mɐ̆vɔːʀɐ̆ˈxɛːxɔː/ Genesis 12:3; הַמֲדַבְּרִים /hɐːmɐ̆ðɐɓbɐ̆ˈʀiːm/ 2 Chronicles 33:18.

• In case a quiescent sheva was followed either by a guttural or yodh, it would turn into mobile according to the rules given below, if preceded by a metheg. Ancient manuscripts support this view. Examples: נִבֳהָל /niːvɔ̆ˈhɔːl/ Proverbs 28:22; שִׁבֲעַת /ʃiːvɐ̆ˈʕɐːθ/ Job 1:3.

• Any sheva with the sign metheg attached to it, would change an ultrashort vowel to a short, or normal length vowel. For this, only ancient, reliable manuscripts can give us a clear picture, since, with time, later vocalizers added to the number of methegs found in the Bible.

The gutturals (אהח"ע), and yodh (י), affect the pronunciation of the sheva preceding them. The allophones of the phoneme /ă/ follow these two rules:

• It would change its sound to imitate that of the following guttural. וּקֳהָת /ˌʔuːqɔ̆ˈhɔːθ/ Numbers 3:17; וְנִזְרֳעָה /vɐ̆nizrɔ̆ˈʕɔː/ Numbers 5:28.

• It would be pronounced as ḥireq before consonantal yodh. Examples: יִרְמִיָהוּ /jiʀmĭˈjɔːhuː/ Jeremiah 21:1; עִנִייָן /ʕiːnĭˈjɔːn/ in Maimonides' autograph in his commentary to the Mishnah.^[]

It must be said that, even though there are no special signs apart /ɛ̆/, /ɐ̆/, /ɔ̆/ to denote the full range of furtive vowels, these remaining four (/u/, /i/, /e/, /o/) are represented by simple sheva (Chateph chireq (אְִ) in the Aleppo Codex is a scribal oddity, and certainly not regular in Hebrew manuscripts with Tiberian vocalization).

All other cases should be treated as zero vowel (quiescent, nah), including the double final sheva (double initial sheva does not exist in this Hebrew dialect), and the sheva in the word שְׁתַּיִם /ˈʃtɐːjim/, read by the Tiberian Masoretes as אֶשְׁתַּיִם /ʔɛʃˈtɐːjim/. This last case has similitudes with phenomena occurring in the Samaritan Pronunciation and the Phoenician language.

Depending on the school of pronunciation (and relying on musical grounds, perhaps), the metheg sign served to change some closed syllables into open ones, and therefore, changing the vowel from short to long, and the quiescent sheva, into a mobile one.

Notes

• 1. In fact, first all stressed vowels were lengthened in pause, see Janssens (1982:58–59). This can be seen by forms like Tiberian כַּף /kaf/ < */kaf/, pausal כָּף /kɔf/ < */kɔːf/ < */kaːf/ < */kaf/. The shift in Tiberian Hebrew of */aː/ > */ɔː/ occurred after this lengthening, but before the loss of phonemicity of length (since words like ירחם with allophonically long [aː] don't show this shift).
• 2. This is attested to by the testimony of Rabbi Joseph Qimḥi (12th century) and by medieval Arabic transcriptions, see Janssens (1982:54–56). There is also possible evidence from the cantillation marks' behavior and Babylonian pataḥ, see Blau (2010:82).
• 3. See אֳנִי /ɔ̆ni/ 'ships' אֲנִי /ăni/ 'I', חֳלִי /ħɔ̆li/ 'sickness' חֲלִי /ħăli/ 'ornament', עֲלִי /ʕăli/ 'ascend!' (Num 21:17) and בַּעֱלִי /baʕɛ̆li/ '(with the) pestle' (Prov 27:22). Blau (2010:117–118) /ɛ̆/ alternates with /ă/ frequently and rarely contrasts with it, e.g. אֱדוֹם /ʔɛ̆ðom/ 'Edom' versus אֲדֹמִי /ʔăðomi/ 'Edomite'. Blau (2010:117–118) /ɔ̆/ is clearly phonemic but bears minimal functional load. Sáenz-Badillos (1993:110) /ă/ is written both with mobile šwa <ְ> and hataf patah <ֲ>. Blau (2010:117)
• 4. In fact, it is not clear that a reduced vowel should be considered as comprising a whole syllable. Note for example that the rule whereby a word's stress shifts to a preceding open syllable to avoid being adjacent to another stressed syllable skips over ultrashort vowels, e.g. עִם־יוֹ֫רְדֵי בוֹר /ʕim-ˈjorăde vor/ 'with those who go down into the pit' מְטֹ֫עֲנֵי חָ֫רֶב /măˈtʼoʕăne ˈħɔrɛv/ 'pierced with a sword'. See Blau (2010:143–144)
• 5. These two rules, as well as the rule that metheg changes sheva from an ultrashort to a normal vowel, are recorded by Solomon Almoli in his Halichot Sheva (Constantinople 1519), though he states that these differences are dying out and that in most places vocal sheva is pronounced like segol. In Oriental communities such as the Syrians, these rules continued to be recorded by grammarians into the 1900s (e.g. Sethon, Menasheh, Kelale Diqduq ha-qeriah, Aleppo 1914), though they were not normally reflected in actual pronunciation. The rules about yodh and metheg, though not the rule about gutturals, is still observed by the Spanish and Portuguese Jews of Amsterdam: Rodrigues Pereira, Martin, 'Hochmat Shelomoh.

References

• 1. Blau (2010:105–106, 115–119)
• 2. Blau (2010:111–112)
• 3. Steiner (1997:149)
• 4. Blau (2010:82, 110)
• 5. Blau (2010:117–118)
• 6. Sáenz-Badillos (1993:110)
• 7. Yeivin (1980:281–282)
• 8. Blau (2010:105–106)
• 9. Blau (2010:143–144)

Bibliography

• Bar-Asher, M. (1998). Scripta Hierosolymitana Volume XXXVII Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew.
• Blau, Joshua (2010). Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. ISBN 1575061295.
• Dotan, A. (1967). The Diqduqe Hatte'amim of Aharon ben Moshe ben Asher.
• Eldar, I. (1994). The Art of Correct Reading of the Bible.
• Ginsburg, C.D. (1897). Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible. http://www.archive.org/details/introductionofma00ginsuoft.
• Golomb, D. M. (1987). Working with no Data: Semitic and Egyptian Studies presented to Thomas O. Lambdin.
• Hayyim, Z. B. (1954). Studies in the Traditions of the Hebrew Language.
• Malone, Joseph L. (1993). Tiberian Hebrew phonology. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
• Sáenz-Badillos, Angel (1993). A History of the Hebrew Language. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521556341.
• Steiner, Richard C. (1997), "Ancient Hebrew", in Hetzron, Robert, The Semitic Languages, Routledge, pp. 145–173, ISBN 0415057671
• (Yeivin, Israel (1980). Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah. Scholars Press. ISBN 0-89130-373-1.

External links

• The Behavior of Strong and Weak Verbs in Modern and Tiberian Hebrew