LL-L "Transliteration" 2003.02.14 (07) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 18.FEB.2003 (07) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 http://www.lowlands-l.net * admin at lowlands-l.net * Encoding: Unicode UTF-8
 Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.htm
 Posting Address: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
 Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
 Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
=======================================================================
 You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
 To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
 text from the same account to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or
 sign off at <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
 L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
 S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Stan Levinson <stlev99 at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Transliteration" 2003.02.14 (06) [E]

Folks,
When Ron first wrote "Thora", I thought it was some
kind of mistake, having never seen this.  The
"thaw/taw" alternation, as well as other Hebrew
letters taking the "dot" in them, is never the case of
two independently existing letters, as far as I know.
It is always a case of grammatically driven
alternation.  Thus "thaw" realized as "s" ("th" in
ancient Hebrew) is impossible at the beginning of the
word except as related to something before it in the
phrase.  The same goes for "p/f", "k/kh", "b/v".
Stan
>
> From: John M. Tait <jmtait at wirhoose.co.uk>
> Subject: LL-L "Transliteration" 2003.02.15 (10) [E]
>
> Ron wrote:
>
> >Ancient/Biblical Hebrew has/had a phoneme inventory
> very much like that of
> >Literary Arabic.  That of Modern Hebrew is
> comparatively impoverished, due
> >to being largely based on Sephardic (Ladino)
> pronunciation and other
> >influences of other European languages, a far cry
> from the "Semitic type"
> >(with which many immigrants from Arabic-speaking
> countries arrive in Israel
> >and for various reasons lose quick-smart).  The
> orthography is based on the
> >old language.  This means that original phonemes
> are still distinguished
> >that in modern pronunciation have coincided.  This
> includes the phonemes
> /ÃZ<caron>¸/
> >(/theta/) (Ã-ª, letter _thaw_ > mod. pron. [tav],
> Yiddish [sof]) and /t/
> (Ã-~,
> >letter _teth_ > mod. pron. [tet], Yiddish [tes]).
> As you can see, Yiddish
> >distinguishes them as /s/ and /t/ respectively,
> while they coincided as /t/
> >in Ladino.
> >
> >For "everyday" use, Hebrew tends to be
> transliterated -- or better to say
> >"transcribed" -- on the basis of modern
> pronunciation.  In Semitic studies
> >this is unacceptable, because the Romanization must
> make all distinctions
> >the native script makes.  This also extends to
> vowel distinctions, many of
> >which are lost in Modern Hebrew but to an extent
> still exist in Yiddish
> >(albeit "destorted").
> >
> >I hope this explained it.
>
> Is the spelling 'Thorah' then simply a
> transliteration system where Teth is
> transcribed as <t> and both dotted and undotted Tau
> as <th>?
>
> I'm familiar with systems where dotted Tau is
> transcribed as <t>, undotted
> Tau as <th>, and Teth using a diacritic, usually a
> dot underneath.
>
> In either system, the undotted Tau in 'kashruth'
> would be transcribed as
> <th>.
>
> John M. Tait.
>
> http://www.wirhoose.co.uk
>
> ----------
>
> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Transliteration
>
> John Magnus,
>
> I, too, am most familiar with the system you
> described ("... dotted Tau is
> transcribed as <t>, undotted Tau as <th>, and Teth
> using a diacritic,
> usually a dot underneath"), also used for Arabic
> (Teth sometimes with a
> stroke trough a <t>).  I am not sure the other one
> is real system.  Maybe it
> is supposed to generally distinguish Taw and Thaw
> from Tet in the absence of
> a diacritic, given that Thaw rarely if ever occurs
> initially.  They are all
> pronounced the same in the Sephardic (> Modern
> Hebrew) pronunciation, so
> things like this tend to be ignored or taken
> lightly.
>
> Regards,
> Reinhard/Ron

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Transliteration

Hey, Stan!

Was it I who wrote <Thorah>?  I think it was Roger or someone he quoted.  I
usually write it <Torah>, though slip-ups are always possible (at least
these days).

Thanks for confirming that a Thaw cannot occur initially.

Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
  <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =======================================================================