Readings of Biblical Hebrew

[Rival]

From different cultures.

I find this really interesting.

 

[John D. Brey]

From different cultures.

I find this really interesting.

I think it's far more interesting than pointed out in the video since the various pronunciation are seminal in interpretation. The Masoretes, realizing that pronunciation equals meaning, or interpretation (for instance the vowels אדם can read "Adam" or "Edom") were aware that the Samaritans were interpreting the text according to a tradition of reading and pronunciation different from those who became the Pharisees.

In some of the readings in the video, the reader ignored consonants (didn't pronounce various consonants) as though they didn't even exist. And in truth they don't in some of the manuscripts since the Masoretes took to using various consonants as vowels in their production of the Masoretic Text. Consonants found in the Masoretic Text, don't exist in other texts. A reader who was handed down a particular tradition for which word is being read might ignore the consonant added by the Masoretes.

In quite a number of cases, the problem arose that the written Bible text would make more sense if slightly modified. The tradition had then been not to “fix” the text but only to read it as if it were “fixed”. In other words, the reader is expected to read not exactly what is written. This is the same process which takes place when someone reads aloud from a book which contains spelling errors. In such cases, you have two forms for the word in question, usually differing only by one letter: one is the written form, Ketiv (

) with consonants only, and the other is the form to be used when reading, Qere (

), with consonants and vowels. An obvious solution would be to include one of these forms in the running text and the other one in a footnote. However, it is done differently: the running text gets the Ketiv with the vowels of the Qere, and the footnote gets the consonants of the Qere. At first glance this looks odd, but it is useful . . ..

hhr-m: Consonants and vowels in the Hebrew script​

The various readings and pronunciations are not just cultural niceties or idiosyncrasy; they're directly related to the meaning of the text. For instance, the Samaritans believed things about what the text was saying that the Pharisees didn't. And the source for the difference was related to whether the tradition created in the Masoretic Text was seminal, or whether a reading not yet transformed by the Masoretes was the foundation for the interpretation.



John

 

[Shaul]

While an interesting topic, the total scripture impacted by these possible multiple pronounciations/interpretations isn't so great as to create major problems.

 

[John D. Brey]

While an interesting topic, the total scripture impacted by these possible multiple pronounciations/interpretations isn't so great as to create major problems.

I couldn't disagree more. A man got nailed to a cross over just these pronunciation problems and the differences between the Samaritans and the Pharisees. And this nailing of a man to a cross has been the crux of division between Jews and much of the Western world. So on that count, I consider these issues a problem of biblical proportions.



John

 

[Rival]

While an interesting topic, the total scripture impacted by these possible multiple pronounciations/interpretations isn't so great as to create major problems.

From a linguistic pov it's fascinating. I'm more interested in the language, not the scripture.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Interesting.

Context is everything. And if for some reason context doesn’t help, then we should go by the original writer’s intent, his meaning.
Translations can be misleading

 

[Ehav4Ever]

From different cultures.

I find this really interesting.

You may be interested in the following.