אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

For discussions which focus upon specific words, their origin, meaning, relationship to other ANE languages.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
ducky
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby ducky » Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:13 am

Hello Isaac,

I don't like to interfere in this discussion you have,
but the כ in בואי כלה is without a dagesh since it comes after a word that ends with an open syllable.

The reason for that is because the letters BGDKPT are "blocked" consonants (I don't know the English term) meaning that their sound is blocked (no air comes out from mouth or nose).

And when these consonants came after a word that is linked to them, and that word ends with a vowel (open syllable), then the pronunciation of these "blocked" consonants was not blocked completely (since the vowel is actually "free-air").

And moving from "free-air" to complete "blocked air" was not done.
And the speakers gave comfort to their mouth making these consonants a little airy.
And with that, the K was KH and the P was PH and the B was BH and the G was GH and the D was DH (as THis) and the T was TH (as THing).

Of course, you can talk how you want to talk - no one will come to arrest you.
But there is no point to argue about the traditional way as it was evolved.
David Hunter

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby Isaac Fried » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:21 pm

David says,
I don't like to interfere in this discussion you have.

You are not interfering, no way, you are, to the contrary, very welcome to contribute to the discussion.
You may be very right in you explanation, the thing is, this is not how we speak Hebrew today. Also, today we make no distinction between a soft כ and a ח.
Do you have a good explanation as to why initial בגדכפת are dgushot?

Isaac Fried, Boston University

User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 602
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby Jason Hare » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:18 pm

Man, you are simply confused. This is a ball of nonsense. Each and every instance here is not only explicable but also predicated on the basis of the rules that are covered in every basic Hebrew grammar. You made up rules of your own, and they predicate nothing. What a mess.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby Isaac Fried » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:30 pm

Jason says
the י in אָכִיל means "she"?

Look at this:
אֻכָּל = א-הוּא-כל, 'consumed', as in Ex. 3:2, with the internal הוּא referring to the סְנֶה.
עִכֵּל = ע-היא-כל, 'digested', post-biblical, with the internal היא referring to the performer of the act עכל.
אָכִיל = אכ-היא-ל, 'edible, eatable', post-biblical, with the internal היא referring to the specific food alleged that it may be safely eaten.
אָכוּל =אכ-הוּא-ל, 'eaten, rotten', post biblical, with the internal הוּא referring to the body being in the state אכל.
אָכְלוּ = אכל-הוּא, 'they ate', with the external הוּא referring to the persons having performed the act אכל.
מָאֲכָל = מה-אכל, as in Gen. 6:21, 'that which is מה fit to be eaten'.
אַכְלָן = אכל-אן, 'glutton, gourmand', post-biblical, with the external אן = אני referring to the person having this disposition or weakness.
אַכְלָנִית = אכלן-היא-את, a female אכלן.
אְכְלָנוּת = אכלן-הוּא-את, 'gluttony', with the extra הוּא-את referring to the condition of being a glutton.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

ducky
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby ducky » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:39 pm

Thanks, Isaac

I will try to expand my words to fill the blanks

1. at first, the six "no-air" letters BGDKPT had only one sound
the B was always B, and the K was always K, and so on...
(which means, that if we would put vowels according to the old ancient way, there was no "Lene Dagesh" and no "Rafe")

2. later on, the speakers, in their natural talk, gave a little air when they pronounced those letters after a vowel.
That is why these letters in the middle of a word, when they come after a vowel are soft.
And so, even if they start a word, but comes after a word that ends with a vowel, and these two words are connected, then still, the letter would be soft.

3. As for your question...
When these letters start a word which is not connected to a previous vowel, then these letters are pronounced in their original state.
because there was no natural process of air getting into them.

4. when they came after a vowel, the "free-air" that came from the mouth while pronouncing the vowel influenced on the next "no-air" letter, and it was pronounced a little bit airy.

So you actually need to see the Dageshed form as the natural form
and the non-Dageshed form as the evolved form

****
and this process also had changes
the Sephardi accent kept it only on three letters BKP
and the Ashkenazi accent kept is on BKP and also soft T as S (as really soft up to an S)
And the Yemenite accent kept it completely for the six letters - hard and soft.

If someone today wants to speak in his comfort way, he can do that
but in today's Hebrew, it is kept according to the Sephardi way
and if someone speaks without keeping this way, it "doesn't sound good (or nice)"

And I'm not talking about cases of two words, such as בואי כלה
in these cases, the first letter of the first word is pronounced hard (even though it comes after a word that ends with a vowel)
but when you have a traditional "combination" it usually keeps its traditional way
(there is a famous song that is called בואי כלה by Ahinoam Nini, and she pronounced it as Kalla, and she should say "khalla" - since it is based on the old "piyut"

and also, in known combination, these thing is kept in "two words"
like: אף על פי כן (=even though)
you say: af 'al pi khen (not ken)
because the previous word (pi) ends with a vowel

but for other cases, it is pronounced hard.
David Hunter

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby Isaac Fried » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:10 pm

David says
there is a famous song that is called בואי כלה by Ahinoam Nini, and she pronounced it as Kalla, and she should say "khalla" - since it is based on the old "piyut"

I don't think Ahinoam Nini אחינועם ניני can sing to a present day Hebrew speaking audience בואי חלה, "come a sweet loaf of bread". I think that even the Hebrew Academy graciously "allows" now to say בואי כַּלָּה KALAH.
The question is: If she encounters חתן וְכַלָּה would she read it וחלה according to the "rules", or would she read it וְכַּלָּה VE-KALAH, according to common sense.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 602
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby Jason Hare » Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:42 am

Isaac Fried wrote:The question is: If she encounters חתן וְכַלָּה would she read it וחלה according to the "rules", or would she read it וְכַּלָּה VE-KALAH, according to common sense.


I cannot imagine anyone hearing חָתָן וְכַלָּה and thinking that they heard חַלָּה in the second word. Seriously, the thing you come up with are just odd.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian

ducky
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby ducky » Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:52 am

Hello Isaac

As I said before, when it comes to two words, then the second word would start as hard
as בואי כלה - the K is hard
and that is fine

only that in this case, since this combination is known, she should have kept it as it is
but it is not a real problem
and any other combination of wordד would start the next word with a Dageshed letter


As for חתן וכלה
the K is soft and it is heard many times

but... some people really say it with a Dagesh

and the thing is that
a lot of people loves to keep the word pronounced in its "regular" form
and even if there is a prefix, they still don't care, because they differ the prefix from the word itself, and by that, they (think they) make it clearer

But there is no problem to understand (and that what I think you are talking about)
it is always understandable
חתן ןכלה
חתול וכלב
נבל וכנור

everyone understand these words when they are pronounced with a soft K
But as I said here also, a lot of people pronounce the letter Dageshed anyway

So I can understand your point
and that is about the common talk, and that is fine
but when one writes something (if he puts vowels) he vowels it as it should
and if someone speaks on the radio or any speech that he needs to be more dignified then he also keeps these rules
and of course, a lot of people just speak in this nice manner all of the time (in their daily talk)

It depends on you and how liberal you want to be or how "conservative" you want to be when it comes to how you use your language

(such as in English, I think, there are those who are more liberal, and there are not.
David Hunter

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby Isaac Fried » Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:38 pm

David says חתול וכלב

I have never heard it being said in free speech חתול וחֶלֶב, and it would not occur to me to say it either. What is wrong with חתול וכֶּלֶב?
This is but one example as to folk common sense overriding rigid, stubborn, senseless, sanctified, academic rules.
On the other hand, I am sure חתול וְחֶלֶב is the way they say it in Israel on the radio, as they are under the thumb there of the Hebrew "Academy" who is dictating to them how to speak "right" and according to the "rules of grammar".

Isaac Fried, Boston University

ducky
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: אִכּוּן, a new Hebrew word

Postby ducky » Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:34 pm

Hello Isaac,

Once again, it is about you and your way, and about anyone and his way.
No point to argue about that.

Some would say it like this - and it would be understood clearly.
And one would say it like that - and it would be understood clearly.

But I think that this subject here in this thread started about you don't realize the point of the rule.
But now you know.

And Hebrew, like any language, is more like a fashion, and such as fashion changes, and each one fits its time. so are languages.

Since Hebrew is a traditional language and based on religious texts, there is a point of trying to preserve its basic rules of the known grammar (as we see in the known old texts)

naturally, a daily-talk (colloquial) is always more liberal than the literary one.

So we're speaking here in two levels:
1. Literature and "conservative" talk, that keeps the traditional rules.
2. Colloquial. that is more liberal and speak in the natural way of the speaker according to what he thinks "sounds better"

each one has its point of its own.
And it seems that in this discussion, you are trying to connect them.
But just see it as two branches of the same tree - two styles of speaking.
David Hunter


Return to “Etymological & Lexicographic Approaches to the Hebrew Bible”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests