B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

Shalom all. I am new here. I started following this video to learn Hebrew:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UU6Fe7lqIo&t=351s

I am not understanding why "ABBA" which consists of 4 letters is written with only one letter "Bet", can anyone explain this to me please?








Thank you. Blessings, Mike Henderson.

Mike,

The dagesh in the bet doubles it. It is called dagesh ḥazak (strong dagesh).

אַבָּא is ʾab-bāʾ [as if אַבְּבָּא] in syllabification. The pataḥ is short and must be in a closed syllable if that syllable is unaccented. Contrast this to אָבִי ʾā-ḇî, which has a soft bet following an open syllable with a long vowel.

By the way, could you add your name to the signature of your profile? It’s not nice to call someone “learning Hebrew.” We’re all into learning Hebrew over on this site. It’s good to have a name to refer to people by. The official policy of the forum is to use your name when you register, but we’ll settle with having it in your signature. Thanks!

Welcome to B-Hebrew!

The Dagesh Hazaq is correct for pointed Hebrew.

But since when is אבא meaning “father” a Hebrew word? It’s not found in the Bible. It’s an Aramaic word. The Hebrew word is אב.

Karl W. Randolph.

Jason Hare wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 11:02 am אַבָּא is used in modern Hebrew (and has been in Hebrew since the Second Temple period), so it has become a Hebrew word.

Thank you. I’m not familiar with Second Temple and later Hebrew, so is אבא for “father” found in the non-Biblical Hebrew writings of that period? Is this another example that the Jews of that period spoke Aramaic in their day-to-day lives, but learned Hebrew for the synagogue and temple?

Karl W. Randolph.

kwrandolph wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 9:48 am

Jason Hare wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 11:02 am אַבָּא is used in modern Hebrew (and has been in Hebrew since the Second Temple period), so it has become a Hebrew word.

Thank you. I’m not familiar with Second Temple and later Hebrew, so is אבא for “father” found in the non-Biblical Hebrew writings of that period? Is this another example that the Jews of that period spoke Aramaic in their day-to-day lives, but learned Hebrew for the synagogue and temple?

Karl W. Randolph.

Well, I guess people don’t speak English as their native language so long as they use French words like rendezvous, hors d’oeuvre, vis-à-vis, fiancé(e), au contraire and the many other French words and expressions adopted by the English language. Change of the English language is allowable, but once you introduce a new word into Hebrew, it becomes some kind of pigeon non-Hebrew language. The only way that Hebrew could be Hebrew is if it didn’t change. But then, which stage of Hebrew? Is Hebrew only Hebrew if it is the Hebrew of the earliest periods of the biblical text? Or do later texts represent Hebrew? I just don’t ever understand when you make this insinuation. I recall you basically claiming that the later books of the Tanach represent non-natural translation Hebrew, perhaps by Aramaic speakers.

I see Hebrew as Hebrew at every separate stage. The same language with some additions, some subtractions, and so on. Whether someone said אָבִי‎ (ʾāḇî), הָאָב אֲשֶׁר לִי‎ (hāʾāḇ ʾăšer lî), הָאָב שֶׁלִּי‎ (hāʾāḇ šellî), or אַ֫בָּא שֶׁלִּי (ʾábbāʾ šellî), it still meant “my father.” I look at the language as it was, not as I think it should have been.

A few years ago, I was watching the national spelling bee (in America), and the first few words were, in my opinion, foreign words. Anyway, when I was a kid, I lost a spelling bee on the word "smorgasbord." I still think that should not have been in an English-language spelling bee. I mention this because you are discussing if abba is Hebrew. That is a really good question. I had no idea it was from Aramaic. I thought it was "daddy" in Biblical Hebrew and av was the more formal "father."

Jason Hare wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 6:29 pm

kwrandolph wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 9:48 am

Jason Hare wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 11:02 am אַבָּא is used in modern Hebrew (and has been in Hebrew since the Second Temple period), so it has become a Hebrew word.

Thank you. I’m not familiar with Second Temple and later Hebrew, so is אבא for “father” found in the non-Biblical Hebrew writings of that period? Is this another example that the Jews of that period spoke Aramaic in their day-to-day lives, but learned Hebrew for the synagogue and temple?

Karl W. Randolph.

Well, I guess people don’t speak English as their native language so long as they use French words like rendezvous, hors d’oeuvre, vis-à-vis, fiancé(e), au contraire and the many other French words and expressions adopted by the English language. Change of the English language is allowable, but once you introduce a new word into Hebrew, it becomes some kind of pigeon non-Hebrew language. The only way that Hebrew could be Hebrew is if it didn’t change. But then, which stage of Hebrew? Is Hebrew only Hebrew if it is the Hebrew of the earliest periods of the biblical text? Or do later texts represent Hebrew? I just don’t ever understand when you make this insinuation. I recall you basically claiming that the later books of the Tanach represent non-natural translation Hebrew, perhaps by Aramaic speakers.

I see Hebrew as Hebrew at every separate stage. The same language with some additions, some subtractions, and so on. Whether someone said אָבִי‎ (ʾāḇî), הָאָב אֲשֶׁר לִי‎ (hāʾāḇ ʾăšer lî), הָאָב שֶׁלִּי‎ (hāʾāḇ šellî), or אַ֫בָּא שֶׁלִּי (ʾábbāʾ šellî), it still meant “my father.” I look at the language as it was, not as I think it should have been.

I think you misunderstand me. Is not this forum for the study of Biblical Hebrew? As such, does that not rule out studying even Second Temple Hebrew, which had somewhat different vocabulary and a different grammar than did Biblical Hebrew? Yes, languages change, and post-Biblical Hebrew is no different in that regard. But if we limit ourselves to Biblical Hebrew, doesn’t that constrain ourselves to discussing only Biblical Hebrew?

As for what Jews on the street spoke, there’s already indication in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, even Daniel, that the day-to-day language was Aramaic.

Note to Kenneth Greifer: I don’t understand why you didn’t think smörgåsbord was a good English word.

Karl W. Randolph.