| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
 Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 13:38:09
|
I plan to do some experiments with writing English in the paleo-hebrew alphabet but want it to be as authentic as possible. I have some suspicions about what I will find but don't want to say anything for now.
Before diving in, I need to know which sounds the letters of the paleo-hebrew alphabet stood for. There seems to be some duplication, and the claim that there were no vowels seems suspicious.
Is it true there were NO vowels in paleo-hebrew? What were aleph, ayin, waw and yod then?
How do we know the matres lectiones were not used in paleo-hebrew?
Is it true paleo-hebrew had no p sound? What was the letter "pe" then?
Should samekh and shin both represent "s", or should "shin" represent the "sh" sound?
If ayin was used like our modern day "y", why the duplication with yod? How are they different?
What exactly is the difference between he and heth? If heth is pronounced as the "ch" in "Bach", where does that leave kaph? What did these four, he, heth, kaph and qoph originally represent?
Here is the list of letters, and the sounds that seem to be associated with them in paleo-hebrew. Let me know if it is in error.
aleph - A as in apple
beth - B as in battle
gimel - G as in given
daleth - D as in doughty
he - H as in hunter
waw - W as wonderful
zayin - Z as in zany
heth - H as in happy
teth - T as in tiny
yod - Y as in yes
kaph - Q as in Quran
lamed - L as in lactose
mem - M as in mother
noun - N as in Nuremberg
ayin - Y as in yellow
samekh - S as in sorrow
pe - P as in pizza
tsade - TS as in Tsar of all the Russias
qoph - Q as in queen
resh - R as in responsible
shin - SH as in should have
thaw - TH as in "thing" or "this" |
Edited by - Linc on 19 Jul 2004 18:20:37 |
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 15:30:43
|
Here is a sample of my experiments. Can you decipher it and guess the quote?
IHVA IZ MAI CPRD AI CAL NT UANT
HI MKY MI TU LAI DAUN IN GRIN PASTIRZ
HI LIDY MI BSAID Y STIL WATRZ
HI RISTRY MAI SL
HI LIDY MI IN PAYS V RITXSNS FR HIZ NIMZ SIK
IA, Y AI UAK YRU Y VALI V Y CADU V DY, I UIL FIR N IVIL
FR YU ART UIY MI, YAI RD AND YAI STAF YI KMFRT MI
YU PRIPRST A TIBL BFR MI IN Y PRZNS V MAIN NMIZ
YU ANINTST MAI HD UIY IL, MAI KUP RUNY VR
CRLI GUDNS AND MRSI CAL FLU MI AL Y DIZ V MAI LAIF
AND AI UIL DUL IN Y HUS V IHVA FR VR |
 |
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 15:50:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Linc
I plan to do some experiments with writing English in the paleo-hebrew alphabet but want it to be as authentic as possible. I have some suspicions about what I will find but don't want to say anything for now.
Before diving in, I need to know which sounds the letters of the paleo-hebrew alphabet stood for. There seems to be some duplication, and the claim that there were no vowels seems suspicious.
Is it true there were NO vowels in paleo-hebrew? What were aleph, ayin, waw and yod then?
How do we know the matres lectiones were not used in paleo-hebrew?
Is it true paleo-hebrew had no p sound? What was the letter "pe" then?
Should samekh and shin both represent "s", or should "shin" represent the "sh" sound?
If ayin was used like our modern day "y", why the duplication with yod? How are they different?
What exactly is the difference between he and heth? If heth is pronounced as the "ch" in "Bach", where does that leave kaph? What did these four, he, heth, kaph and qoph originally represent?
Here is the list of letters, and the sounds that seem to be associated with them in paleo-hebrew. Let me know if it is in error.
-snip-
"Errors" depend upon one's view, or dare I say, religious beliefs / politics. Here's what I believe the mapping is:
aleph - A as in father
beth - B as in battle
gimel - G as in given
daleth - D as in door (don't know what doughty is, too lazy to look up)
he - E as in met
waw/vav/vau - V as victory, also U sounding like o's in too
zayin - Z as in zany
heth - H as in happy, also like German ich, as in "Ich ein Berliner."
teth - Th as in think
yod - I sounding like long e beet, Y as in yes, and J as in Jesus
kaph - K as in king
lamed - L as in lactose
mem - M as in mother
noun - N as in Nuremberg
ayin/oyin - O as in open
samekh - S as in sorrow
pe - P as in pizza
tsade - Ts as in Tsar of all the Russias
qoph - F as in beef and also probably Q as in Quran (depending on pointing - I believe the text has been altered)
resh - R as in responsible
shin - SH as in should have
thaw/tav/tau - T as in tea
Look at ha-arets in Genesis 1:1 - he-aleph-resh-tsade = EARTs. Notice that the internal vowel "e" is not written. Then allow for people to follow the written word (forgetting the internal omitted "e") and morph the Ts sound into Th because it's easier to say, and one gets: EARTh. Which is eactly what arets means: earth. |
Edited by - Walter on 14 Jul 2004 15:53:18 |
|
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 16:27:29
|
quote:
"Errors" depend upon one's view, or dare I say, religious beliefs / politics. Here's what I believe the mapping is:
Thanks Walter. Your mapping changes things quite a bit; instead of reducing my sample text by 25%, it only reduced it by 15% from the original English spelling. Of course, 4 missing letters ordinarily, if well balanced, would only lead to a 15% reduction. Your version of the alphabet is more balanced than mine. Here is what the sample text looks like with your alphabet; do you find it more readable?
IEHOUA IZ MAI CEPRD AI CAL NAT UANT
HI MEIKEY MI TU LAI DAUN N GRIN PASTIURZ
HI LIDEY MI BISAID YE STIL WATRZ
HI RISTOREY MAI SOL
HI LIDEY MI IN PAYS U RIXSNES FOR HIZ NEIMZ SEIK
IA, YO AI UAK YRU YE UALI U YE CADO U DEY, I UIL FIR NO IUIL
FOR YU ART UIY MI, YAI RAD AND YAI STAF YI KMFRT MI
YU PRIPEREST A TEIBL BIFOR MI IN YE PREZENS U MAIN ENEMIZ
YU ANOINTEST MAI HED UIY OIL, MAI KUP RUNEY OUR
CRLI GUDNES AND MRSI CAL FALO MI AL YE DEIZ U MAI LAIF
AND AI UIL DUEL IN YE HUS U IEHOUA FOR EUR |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2004 : 10:01:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Linc
IEHOUA IZ MAI CEPRD AI CAL NAT UANT
HI MEIKEY MI TU LAI DAUN N GRIN PASTIURZ
HI LIDEY MI BISAID YE STIL WATRZ
HI RISTOREY MAI SOL
HI LIDEY MI IN PAYS U RIXSNES FOR HIZ NEIMZ SEIK
IA, YO AI UAK YRU YE UALI U YE CADO U DEY, I UIL FIR NO IUIL
FOR YU ART UIY MI, YAI RAD AND YAI STAF YI KMFRT MI
YU PRIPEREST A TEIBL BIFOR MI IN YE PREZENS U MAIN ENEMIZ
YU ANOINTEST MAI HED UIY OIL, MAI KUP RUNEY OUR
CRLI GUDNES AND MRSI CAL FALO MI AL YE DEIZ U MAI LAIF
AND AI UIL DUEL IN YE HUS U IEHOUA FOR EUR
I can figure out that this is Psalm 23. Care to expound the purpose for the exercise? <g> |
|
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2004 : 13:44:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Walter
I can figure out that this is Psalm 23. Care to expound the purpose for the exercise? <g>
What would English look like if it were written the same way paleo-Hebrew was?
Since you tell me paleo-hebrew had four vowels, I'm wondering, how exactly does one know when to drop a vowel when writing a word? You mentioned the word ha'aretz, where the internal e is dropped, but not the initial one.
Supposing one can "sound out" a word, how would one decide which letters were "important", the paleo-Hebrew way?
I am guessing that if one could do this, that a lot of regional variations in English pronunciation would disappear from view, leaving something closer to the "raw" words in print.
I also suspect that linkages between English and old Hebrew might become more obvious.
Finally there is the childish fascination with secret codes and ciphers and stuff. And as a longtime computer programmer, I have an interest in compression. The final theory I'm investigating is that the paleo-Hebrew alphabet, and how words were rendered using it, is responsible for the incredible compactness of paleo-Hebrew. I want to see if English could be as compact if spelled similarly. This wouldn't be shorthand exactly, but would make it easier to write things with a pen, and double as a sort of cipher/code.
Come brothers, let us turn the clock back 3000 years, when IHUA walked among us. |
Edited by - Linc on 15 Jul 2004 17:24:43 |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2004 : 16:06:49
|
I regret these language barriers go way over my head. I can see so many similarities, but fail to understand, or even phatom the perplexity. Seems as too many years... too many travels, too many conquests and migrations. Maybe it is the perplexity itself which keeps me at a standstill, frozen.
|
|
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2004 : 17:22:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Manuel
I regret these language barriers go way over my head. I can see so many similarities, but fail to understand, or even phatom the perplexity.
A simpler explanation of what I am trying to do presented itself, so I will share it.
Imagine an ancient speaker of paleo-Hebrew, a learned scribe. He comes along and learns to speak English at an equal level of facility. With no knowledge of the English writing system, how would he render English in his paleo-Hebrew alphabet?
For purposes of computer communication (and to more easily look for connections) the plan is to substitute in letters from the English alphabet that correspond to the letters of the paleo-Hebrew alphabet.
That is why I posted the two different examples above.
Does anyone have any thoughts on how to do this?
One problem with the naive straight-forward phonetic approach is that instead of IHUA, as in paleo-Hebrew, I get IEHOUA which isn't as compact.
If anyone has some thoughts on how to simulate "English written as paleo-Hebrew", please share! |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2004 : 18:46:46
|
| Oh, I see/hear. I was mixing my second lanquage (Spanish) and differentiating it. When in fact, combining them helps. I guess some one which speaks more than two languages has a better far-reaching understanding. |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2004 : 19:02:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Linc
...
Imagine an ancient speaker of paleo-Hebrew, a learned scribe. He comes along and learns to speak English at an equal level of facility. With no knowledge of the English writing system, how would he render English in his paleo-Hebrew alphabet?
For purposes of computer communication (and to more easily look for connections) the plan is to substitute in letters from the English alphabet that correspond to the letters of the paleo-Hebrew alphabet.
That is why I posted the two different examples above.
Does anyone have any thoughts on how to do this?
One problem with the naive straight-forward phonetic approach is that instead of IHUA, as in paleo-Hebrew, I get IEHOUA which isn't as compact.
If anyone has some thoughts on how to simulate "English written as paleo-Hebrew", please share!
I gave five (5) vowels in my posted view: AEIOU, which I believe are "pure" vowel sounds as in Spanish.
Some consonants are not represented by a single letter in English: Th (Teth), Sh (Shiyn), and Ts (Tsamek). There used to be a character for he last one in Spain, a "c" with a comma-type downward portion (called a C-cedilla, I believe). For these one needs to assign special characters or just get used to using "C" for Tsamek for example.
I believe "I" (yod) is for itself, and "Y" and "J." Old writings did not have a J and one understood when the "I" was for the vowel "I" and when it was pronounced as the consonant "J" by usage. According to the Oxford dictionary the "J" is just another form of the "I." For example, "jew" is spelled "iewe" in the 1611 KJV. Like wise "V" was for consonant "V" and for vowel "U."
(If you have not seen my post, I hold that "the Lord" is derived from IAUE - four pure vowels which sound like Yahweh to the unattentive ear.) |
|
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2004 : 18:08:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Walter
I gave five (5) vowels in my posted view: AEIOU, which I believe are "pure" vowel sounds as in Spanish.
Some consonants are not represented by a single letter in English: Th (Teth), Sh (Shiyn), and Ts (Tsamek). There used to be a character for he last one in Spain, a "c" with a comma-type downward portion (called a C-cedilla, I believe). For these one needs to assign special characters or just get used to using "C" for Tsamek for example.
I believe "I" (yod) is for itself, and "Y" and "J." Old writings did not have a J and one understood when the "I" was for the vowel "I" and when it was pronounced as the consonant "J" by usage. According to the Oxford dictionary the "J" is just another form of the "I." For example, "jew" is spelled "iewe" in the 1611 KJV. Like wise "V" was for consonant "V" and for vowel "U."
(If you have not seen my post, I hold that "the Lord" is derived from IAUE - four pure vowels which sound like Yahweh to the unattentive ear.)
According to Gerard Gertoux it is I-Eh-Ou-Ah, and comes out sounding somewhere between Yehowah and Jehovah. I have his book and thought it made a pretty convincing case. I don't speak Hebrew or Greek; do you have any comments on Mr. Gertoux book, agreeing or disagreeing?
Also, I am still wondering how would a paleo-Hebrew speaker represent modern English words in his native alphabet system of writing. I think it would be "cool" as a code for sending messages between Israelite friends.
Why do the Jews claim there were "no vowels" in paleo-Hebrew? Walter, I am new here and don't know you yet. Could you share some of your sources with me?
In my transliteration I used the letter Y to represent the "th" sound because the Old English letter yogh actually did represent the th sound; it was around Shakespeares time that people confused Y with I.
Yes, I am familiar with the I-Y-J confusion, which is a fairly recent (last 500 years) thing in English. As far as I know, it has nothing to do with paleo-Hebrew.
In Spanish today "I" has the "ee" sound, and I am content to use it as such in any paleo-Hebrew <-> English mapping we arrive at.
Also I used C to stand for the "sh" sound, because in most artificial languages of the last century, such as Esperanto and Loglan, the letter C was reused for that exact same sound.
Finally I reused X to stand for "ts" because "ks" is the letter most similar to "ts".
I'd really like to know how to cramp words down into fewer letters, paleo-Hebrew style. The Hebrew compression had the property that it was still readable and didn't include any more ambiguity than necessary. I'd like to keep those properties in whatever compression scheme we come up with. Ideas? |
Edited by - Linc on 19 Jul 2004 18:22:59 |
|
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2004 : 18:19:31
|
After incorporating Walters knowledge, the English->paleo-Hebrew mapping that I have looks like this:
A - aleph
B - beth
G - gimel
D - daleth
U - he
Z - zayin
H - heth
Y - teth
I - yod
K - kaph
L - lamed
M - mem
N - noun
O - ayin
S - samekh
P - pe
X - tsade
F - qoph
R - resh
C - shin
T - tau
Walter, if I'm misrepresenting the mapping you suggested, please correct me. |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2004 : 19:49:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Linc
After incorporating Walters knowledge, the English->paleo-Hebrew mapping that I have looks like this:
A - aleph
B - beth
G - gimel
D - daleth
U - he
Z - zayin
H - heth
Y - teth
I - yod
K - kaph
L - lamed
M - mem
N - noun
O - ayin
S - samekh
P - pe
X - tsade
F - qoph
R - resh
C - shin
T - tau
Walter, if I'm misrepresenting the mapping you suggested, please correct me.
Given your explanation for certain of the mappings above, the only correction is that He should be E.
I don't know who Gerard Gertoux is and therefore have no opinion of him, except that I disagree with the pronunciation of the Hebrew word for "the Lord." One says "AlleluIA" - for Allelu IAUE - not "AlleluIE."
The only thing I've read regarding the lack of vowels in Hebrew, is that there was on old script that did originally have them, but that the modern script did not. This post was on a web board which I was in the process of loosing access to. I'd love to see an official language source repeat this statement. It's in alignment with what I've figured out.
The differences between what you've mapped and what I use is:
E - he (already mentioned)
T - teth - the best mapping to Th I could come up with at the time
C - tsade - after the Spanish usage
W - shin - because it follows the shape of the shin
X - tau - because it follows the shape of the tau/tav
Walter |
Edited by - Walter on 19 Jul 2004 19:51:27 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
A theory of Paleo-Hebrew
