Talk:Tiberian Hebrew

Judea: did not exist during the time stated

The article currently reads: "... Masoretic scholars living in the Jewish community of Tiberias in ancient Judea c. 750–950 CE."

No such political entity as Judea existed during the Abassid Caliphate. Also, the normal definition of ancient wouldn't include the 10'th Century of the common era.

I'm no historian. Anyone care to correct this? IAmNitpicking (talk) 03:29, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

No political entity perhaps, but Judea is also a geographic term for "the mountainous southern part of Palestine". It has not ceased existing simply because the area changed hands. Dimadick (talk) 08:59, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

That may be, but Tiberias was most definitely not in that region; it was in the Galilee. The Hebrew pointing tradition of Judea is called, ironically, the Palestinian vocalization. פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 17:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Premature Clickage

Meant to say, Undid vandalism by 107.77.220.64. Didn't feel like restoring the vandalism to fix the missing IP address. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAmNitpicking (talk • contribs) 16:30, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Biblical Pronunciations

The biblical pronunciations do not cite any sources, at the time that I am writing this. Most of the pronunciations are corroborated by (A) grammarian's writings and (B) liturgical pronunciations. However, some of them seem questionable, and others seem blatantly wrong, but I can't be sure without the author's citations.

ע and ח

I have read in many grammatical writings, including an appendix on the Kuzari that there are four "guttural", i.e. pharyngeal/epiglottal letters, namely אהח"ע. Likewise, ח and ע were definitely pronounced [ħ] and [ʕ], since they are both pharyngeal, and both consistent with the Sephardi and Yemenite pronunciations. However, according to the article, ח and ע might also have been pronounced as [χ] and [ʁ], respectively. Neither of them are biblical, because neither of them are neither pharyngeal nor epiglottal, and I have no idea where they get this "ע as [ʁ]" pronunciation from.

שֹ

The שֹ is almost unanimously pronounced like the letter ס, namely [s]. I understand that it is very unlikely that God designed his language with two letters that make the same sound, especially when one is an allophone of another unrelated consonant, but the article claims that it was pronounced like the voiceless alveolar lateral fricative. Never in my life have I heard such a pronunciation, and it sounds nothing like [s], so this pronunciation is almost definitely incorrect, even if the author didn't just pick a random unique consonant and call it the "biblical" pronunciation of שֹ.

ק

The ק is almost unanimously pronounced [k], the outlier being the Yemenite pronunciation, which reserves the [g] sound for ק and pronounces the letter גּ as [d͡ʒ] rather than [g]. Although these consonants are unique, the letter גּ is the only one of the six בג"ד כפ"ת letters, or plosive-fricative pairs of allophones, whose allophones come from differents parts of the mouth. In Yemenite Hebrew,
Labial:
ב = voiced labial fricative
בּ = voiced labial plosive
פ = voiceless labial fricative
פּ = voiceless labial plosive
Dental:
ד = voiced dental fricative
דּ = voiced dental plosive
ת = voiceless dental fricative
תּ = voiceless dental plosive
Velar:
ג = voiced velar fricative
גּ = voiced postalveolar affricate (the outlier)
כ = voiceless velar fricative
כּ = voiceless velar plosive
Therefore, the letter גּ was almost definitely pronounced like the voiced velar plosive, [g].
The article claims that the letter ק is pronounced [kˤ], which makes sense, since it's similar enough to the nearly unanimous [k], but distinct from כּ, and similar to the Yemenite צ and ט which are different from ס/שֹ and תּ, because the former two are pharyngealized, and the latter two are not. Nevertheless, the article is yet to cite a source for this.

ר

The ר is unanimously a rhotic consonant. I have read in many grammatical writings, including the aforementioned appendix to The Kuzari that the ר cannot take a dagesh because it cannot be doubled. Therefore, the ר was definitely pronounced as an alveolar trill or uvular trill, because trills cannot be audibly doubled. However, the article incorrectly asserts that the ר was pronounce like an alveolar flap, which can be doubled, in the Spanish word "perro" ([pɛɾːo]), for example.
SapphireBrick (talk) 21:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

The variant שׂ lost its unique pronunciation very early, possibly at the end or near the end of biblical times, and and started to be pronounced as [s]. The pronunciation as voiceless alveolar lateral fricative [ɬ] is the most common reconstruction I saw for שׂ. From what I read it is hypothesis that the letters ח ,ש and ע all represented two different vowels in biblical Hebrew:

ח was both voiceless pharyngeal fricative [ħ] and voiceless uvular fricative [ꭓ].

ע was both voiced pharyngeal fricative [ʕ] and voiced velar fricative [ɣ].

And ש was both voiceless palato-alveolar fricative [ʃ] and voiceless alveolar lateral fricative [ɬ].

We know that the letters ח and ע were pronounced differently since when the bible was translated into Greek names with those letters were consistently transcribe in two different ways and they also correspond with those names in Arabic were they have two different letters for those different consonants, ح and خ for ח and ع and غ for ע. As with ש those second consonants change but unlike שׂ they merged with the first consonant and there was only one sound to those letters when the Niqqud was invented. 2A01:73C0:600:4F75:4F39:7716:5294:54AB (talk) 16:55, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Conjunctive /ʔu/

The article currently says that conjunctive וּ was read as /ʔu/, equivalent to אוּ. But Geoffrey Khan's Tiberian Pronunciation of Biblical Hebrew (page 178) contradicts this, saying "the onset of the syllable represented by conjunction וּ was not ʾalef." Is this correct? Should we change the article? AJD (talk) 17:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)