Emmanuel or Immanuel ?

[Charity]

I have noticed that in the OT (God with us) Immanuel is spelled this way and every time I have seen it in the NT it is spelled Emmanuel. Could one of you scholars tell me if there is a reason for this spelling or is it just an error in the translation?

Sounds like a good question for Angellous or Dunemeister, or some of you other scholars.

 

[Smoke]

I have noticed that in the OT (God with us) Immanuel is spelled this way and every time I have seen it in the NT it is spelled Emmanuel. Could one of you scholars tell me if there is a reason for this spelling or is it just an error in the translation?

Sounds like a good question for Angellous or Dunemeister, or some of you other scholars.

Neither was written in the Latin alphabet; Isaiah was written in Hebrew and Matthew in Greek. So in Isaiah the translators are transliterating from one alphabet, and in Matthew from another.

In Hebrew, Immanuel is written with a vowel point usually transliterated as "I," and in Greek it's written with an eta (E). Originally, though, the Hebrew wouldn't have had any vowel points, and would have been something like `MNU 'L (or maybe MN L; I'm pretty vague on the history of Hebrew orthography).

I don't know whether the pronunciation shifted between the time Matthew was written and the time the vowel points were added, or whether the author of Matthew just guessed wrong. Maybe somebody else will know.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Neither was written in the Latin alphabet; Isaiah was written in Hebrew and Matthew in Greek. So in Isaiah the translators are transliterating from one alphabet, and in Matthew from another.

In Hebrew, Immanuel is written with a vowel point usually transliterated as "I," and in Greek it's written with an eta (E). Originally, though, the Hebrew wouldn't have had any vowel points, and would have been something like `MNU 'L (or maybe MN L; I'm pretty vague on the history of Hebrew orthography).

I don't know whether the pronunciation shifted between the time Matthew was written and the time the vowel points were added, or whether the author of Matthew just guessed wrong. Maybe somebody else will know.

The Hebrew letters are ayin mem nun vav aleph lamed.

ayin and aleph don't really have their own consonant sounds. It can sound like whatever vowel is supposed to go with it.

If it helps... it's pronounced

ee as in feet, mon as in john, oo as in screw, and el as in el.

The transliteration is irrelevant.

 

[Smoke]

The Hebrew letters are ayin mem nun vav aleph lamed.

ayin and aleph don't really have their own consonant sounds. It can sound like whatever vowel is supposed to go with it.

If it helps... it's pronounced

ee as in feet, mon as in john, oo as in screw, and el as in el.

Do we know how it would have been pronounced when Isaiah was written? Would it have been written the same, only without the vowel points? Like I said, I'm pretty vague on Hebrew.

The transliteration is irrelevant.

But the transliterations are what raise the question.

In Matthew, the reader of the English Bible is reading a transliteration of a transliteration.

 

[Lucian]

It's Emmanuel in both Matthew and Septuagint, so the Greeks certainly transliterated it that way.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Do we know how it would have been pronounced when Isaiah was written? Would it have been written the same, only without the vowel points? Like I said, I'm pretty vague on Hebrew.

The name is also a phrase that might have been used commonly, so we're pretty set on the pronunciation... and yes, it would have been written the same only without the vowel points.

But the transliterations are what raise the question.

There are better questions to ask.

After all, look at some versions of Matthew 1... Judah becomes Judas... Perez becomes Phares... and all sorts of weird things happen to the names in transliteration.