Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Yeshu, Yehoshua, or Yeshua
#31
Luc Lefebvre Wrote:Here's another video showing the pronunciation of the ayin, this time from the perspective of ancient Hebrew. The ayin is about 6 minutes and 50 seconds in,

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7RIAPosxEI&feature=plcp">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7RIAPosxEI&feature=plcp</a><!-- m -->

Hi Luc,

That individual seems to understand how to pronounce the letter. However, I've yet to see it applied in modern Hebrew speech. Do you have any videos of modern-day Hebrew speech where the letter is pronounced as the video above shows ?

I've heard numerous speeches in modern Israeli Hebrew, all of which show a lack of the proper pronunciation of the letter Ayin (this is especially true of those who belong to the Ashkenazic tradition).

Even among the Sephardic tradition, I've not heard the letter pronounced properly. See for instance the audio files here:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/ptmp3prq.htm">http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/ptmp3prq.htm</a><!-- m -->

This is an audio collection of the Torah, but not once did I hear the guttural stop for Ayin. Instead, it sounds like the familiar "a" sound.

+Shamasha
Reply
#32
Paul Younan Wrote:That individual seems to understand how to pronounce the letter. However, I've yet to see it applied in modern Hebrew speech. Do you have any videos of modern-day Hebrew speech where the letter is pronounced as the video above shows ?
Nope. As you said, it seems to be lost, and this channel is so far the only place where I've seen it used. He has another video on the noun vs verb of Yeshua where he pronounces it properly (there is still an "ah" sound, but it is a furtive patach, so if I remember correctly [it's been years since I watched the video] he had the sudden stop after it).
Reply
#33
I've heard that some natives even have a hard time pronouncing the letter. Roth, in his alphabet table, describes ayin as being pronounced "ai or silent".
Reply
#34
ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:I've heard that some natives even have a hard time pronouncing the letter. Roth, in his alphabet table, describes ayin as being pronounced "ai or silent".

Hey Sniper

Hebrew, we must remember, is only a recently revived language as an everyday spoken language. It was dead for over 2,000 years since the diaspora began (except as a liturgical tongue.)

The Jews who stayed in the middle east (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt) and spoke Aramaic, and later Arabic, pronounced Ayin correctly. Those who went to Poland, Germany and Russia lost the pronunciation over time.

Ayin is not silent, nor is it an "ai" sound. It's unfortunate when you watch videos on YouTube of messianic Jews trying to say Messiah's name, you hear Ye-shoo-wa. There is no -wa at the end of the name.

To me when I read Hebrew it is much more familiar than when I hear a modern Israeli speak it. The Ayin is foreign sounding to me. It sounds made up. So does the V sound for Waw. And the F sound for Peh. The S sound for Tau is pretty annoying too...I don't know what's with this "Shabbas" pronunciation, but it's like a loud screech to my ears. It's Shabbat, not Shabbas.

These are recent changes, unfortunately, and very sloppy.

+Shamasha
Reply
#35
I see what you mean. There is an ayin in the name of the Messiah. A lot of people have stated that alef has no sound and that there is no "w" sound in Hebrew. Alef is so commonly used that I don't see how it couldn't have a sound. It is the Hebrew/Aramaic "a" and is pronounced as such. And base on what I've read, ancient Hebrew and Syriac both pronounce vav with a "w" sound because it used to be "waw". Many Jews write the Tetragramaton as YHVH (Yahveh), when it would actually have been pronounced according to YHWH (Yahweh).
Reply
#36
ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:I see what you mean. There is an ayin in the name of the Messiah. A lot of people have stated that alef has no sound and that there is no "w" sound in Hebrew. Alef is so commonly used that I don't see how it couldn't have a sound. It is the Hebrew/Aramaic "a" and is pronounced as such. And base on what I've read, ancient Hebrew and Syriac both pronounce vav with a "w" sound because it used to be "waw". Many Jews write the Tetragramaton as YHVH (Yahveh), when it would actually have been pronounced according to YHWH (Yahweh).

So Sniper, what we have is a situation not much different than if Latin were revived as a spoken language in Italy. Imagine if Italians fled Italy due to persecution 2,000 years ago and settled in China and other countries in the far east. During that time, their everyday language became whatever language was spoken where they lived. But they kept Latin for church use, much like they do today.

2,000 years later, they emigrate back to Italy and attempt to revive Latin. It's likely going to have many changes and influences from Chinese, especially in pronunciation and accent.

Unfortunately, that's the situation we have with modern Israeli Hebrew today. And how that affects us is this: it's different enough in pronunciation from all its sister languages from around the region, that is sounds foreign. Both to the majority Arabic and minority Aramaic speakers.

Specifically, it affects us in the "Messianic" circles because people tend to associate the sounds made by modern Hebrew with how it's "supposed" to sound. Which is totally inaccurate.

To be sure, and fair, all languages change over time. And accents and pronunciations can vary from region to region even within the same language. But, the case with modern Israeli Hebrew is even more complicated due to the things mentioned above.

Aleph isn't an A, either. Remember that there are no vowels in the 22 letter alphabet. These are truly only only consonants. Aleph is a consonant just like Ayin, but it is a lighter guttural sound. It's close to the English uh as in "uh-oh!". If you hear an Arabic person pronounce "Allah" for God, or an Aramaic person pronounce "Allaha" for God, you will hear the proper sound. It sounds more like "Uh-lah-uh" if you spell it phonetically in Latin characters.

The problem is also with convention. Realizing that the Aleph is not an A sound, you'll notice that Jews usually spell it E when writing 'lh ( the apostrophe being aleph). And from that we usually get the "Elohim" spelling in English.

All of this is wrong, and because of two reasons: (1) the already mentioned problems above with modern Hebrew and (2) the lack of exact equivalent sounds and letters in Latin characters.

To summarize, if you were transported back thousands of years and could hear Moses and Jesus speak, it would probably sound very "Arabic" to you.

I've had many Jewish friends tell me that our Aramaic speech sounds a lot like Arabic of the surface. And I always respond by saying that's how it's supposed to sound! The sound you are hearing is how your ancestors sounded in the past.

+Shamasha
Reply
#37
That's fascinating. I always thought that the Estrangelo font looked like the Arabic font. Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic are all related and very close. And all of these languages have evolved to some extent (which is what I think you're pointing out). If you look at the English in the 1611 King James Version or the 1560 Geneva Bible, you'll realize that it is not the same English. It's understandable to the reader, but the words are spelled differently and sometimes they mean different things than they do now. You are from Assyria, correct? Did you use Aramaic as only a liturgical language or as your common language?
Reply
#38
Yes, from Nineveh in old Assyria. Specifically from the mountains north of Nineveh, in modern-day Turkey. This is where the people were scattered in the mountains after Nineveh was destroyed (see the book of Nahum.)

Aramaic is our everyday language. Specifically, what's called by linguists today Neo-Aramaic. Liturgically we use classical Aramaic.

+Shamasha
Reply
#39
You mean the Biblical Nineveh? That's pretty awesome. I've been fascinated with Peshitta scholarship ever since I got a copy of the Lamsa Bible for Christmas. I'm a lover of the Lamsa Bible, but I prefer the Roth and Bauscher translations (haven't gotten his Interlinear yet). I'm hoping to get Janet Magiera's transations (particularly the Messianic, because it probably represents the Peshitta text better). Her Interlinear format is real odd. I prefer the format you're using in your Interlinear because it is actually INTERLINEAR like the Jay P. Green translation.
Reply
#40
Quote:I'm hoping to get Janet Magiera's transations (particularly the Messianic, because it probably represents the Peshitta text better).

SS2,

It is a more accurate translation of the Western "Peshitto" revised text of the Original Eastern "Peshitta" Text of the New Testament. David Bauscher's version of the Western Peshitto revised text, is less accurate then Janet Magiera's translation, where she retains more of the Eastern readings than he does, and is less interpretive than his is in places. Andrew Roth's version retains all the eastern readings, but has his interpretive bias of doctine and theology in some places, as does Bauscher's version. I haven't seen this in Janet's version yet.

Janet made what she calls a "Vertical Interlinear" because she wanted to have more study features built into the format...it takes more room and pages that way, but is more helpful in studying the text.

But all this can be done and then some at the super fantastic ---> <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.Dukhrana.com">http://www.Dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->

Long live the Eastern Peshitta Text! <!-- s:bigups: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/bigups.gif" alt=":bigups:" title="Big Ups" /><!-- s:bigups: -->

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#41
Thanks, Chuck. You've been an asset to me!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)