I've been chatting with a few folks over at Chana's blog recently (at times it can be a great place for random discussions, since she's not very engaged in comment moderation). I made a quick comment about how I disapproved of Chana using the Ashkenazi pronunciation in writing (since she's part Sefaradi), and it spurred some reader interaction (actually kind of proud about that). I do still want to write a post glorifying speaking ("Modern") Hebrew as a language, but it might be wise to say a few words about proper Hebrew pronunciation first anyway. The historical aspect of this subject has actually recently had exhaustive coverage in the blog of my newfound online friend, Joel Davidi. The only problem is that his blog offers no opinion, only a record of the opinions of others.
It should be remembered, first of all, that it makes a great difference how Hebrew is pronounced, for we use Hebrew in our prayers to G-d, and certainly we wouldn't want to be speaking to him blasphemously in some non-language jargon, but rather in a clear precise Hebrew, as He intended. Also, in Israel today, the way one pronounces the language has strong socio-political connotations, and in some places the way you pronounce the consonants is definitive of who you are and what you stand for.
My opinion has always been pretty straightforward on this matter: while there are Ashkenazim who'll tell you that there is a certain antiquity to their pronunciation, and that there have always been different Hebrew pronunciations, especially with regards to the different schools of nikkud that flourished in Israel a millenia ago, I still feel their words are misleading. The "authenticity" in this pronunciation is the dried skeleton of authenticity. Hebrew, friends, is a Middle Eastern, Semitic language, and it cannot be separated from those roots. Most of what constitutes the Ashkenazi pronunciation is purely a European and even a Germanic influence on this Middle Eastern language (which, linguistically, can lend itself to absurdities). Forget the pronunciation; the very way children of the lands of the uncircumcised move their mouths and lips is alien to any Semitic tongue. The most beneficial thing for them would be to study the native usages of other Semitic languages so they themselves can see what a perversion their speech was.
Vowels: They'll also say that they differentiate between the kamatz and the patah', and long vowels and short vowels more than Sefaradim. The truth is that it's mostly Israeli and a small group of Sefaradim who did not make any distinction at all between these vowels, especially considering that Arabic does differentiate between them. From Morocco to Iran different forms of the kamatz were in use, that were present in words, but were very discreet about their presence, unlike the clumsy European kamatz.
Syllables: Then of course is the מלרע/מלעיל (mil'el/mil'ra) issue. For anyone who doesn't know; in words with more than one sylable, mil'el is stressing the first syllable and mil'ra is stressing the last. German Yiddish and English obviously are mil'el languages. Hebrew is a mil'ra language. Anglicizing Hebrew words to be mil'ra is obviously just laziness and a corruption of our language. Nothing else to say about that.
Consonants: In the aforementioned blog comment, I said I got the impression that Chana wasn't the biggest scholar of biblical Hebrew in the world because "when someone is "still" using "suf"s instead of "tav"s you get the impression it would be impossible for them to grasp the beauty in the tongue of G-d". The consonants have always been a point of contention among us, the "ת רפויה" especially. But I'm concerned only with what seems most correct, not bickering. I see the words of the outspoken Meir Mazuz (today's leading Sefaradi grammarian) on this subject as being correct: theoretically it should be similar to the Arabic ث ("th") sound (which, unlike popular belief, is not much like the English "th", but is more like an "airy" hard t sound), but if you have a hard time pronouncing that all the time, you're better off saying "t" instead of "s" since it's much closer to the "t" sound.
Other than that, it's obviously right and correct to differentiate the א's from ע's, ח's from כ's, ט's from ת's, ק's from כ's and ס's from צ's (as in the other Semitic languages).
27 comments:
Hebrew, friend, is a Northwest Semitic language, and Arabic is not. They ave different phonologies and always have. Hebrew pronunciation of the Edot Hamizrach was just as corrupted by Arabic as that of Ashkenazim was by European languages. You are welcome to enjoy your own pronunciation, but please don't be under any illusions that it reflects more truly than others Hebrew as spoken in Israel at any point before the year 1000.
"Hebrew, friend, is a Northwest Semitic language, and Arabic is not"- Yes, but Hebrew is also not an Eastern European Germanic language. Anyway, both Hebrew and Arabic are "Central" Semitic languages if that puts you at ease. The only difference between the two (Northern and Central) being consonant changes, (as in the "zahav-dahab", "telat-shalosh" and "tur-tzur" changes), and the fact that the northwest languages exchange the "dad"s for "tzadi"s (as in a'rd'-aretz. Not to suggest that Hebrew has no "dad". אדרבה, there is a tradition that in shma' one should lengthen the dalet sound, not the chet sound. How could the sound of such a consonant be lengthened if not for the fact that it's a "dad" sound (Meir Mazuz concurs)).
So again, as long as Hebrew, Arabic and Western (spoken) Aramaic are in the same linguistic family, it's best to study the latter two guide to understanding ancient Hebrew. I mean, I'm not saying to come out sounding like a Samaritan, just that the European languages are of no use in furthering our understanding of Hebrew. Even if there is much about ancient Hebrew we cannot know, there's certainly a lot more to be gained from listening to a Mandaean Aramaic speaker than, say, the Belzer Rebbe.
ض(dad):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%B8%8C%C4%81d
Forget it amigo G-d speaks to us primarily in yiddish.
If you mean the Rebbe, he is NOT G-d! ; )
Ok, let's try this. What time and place in history do you take as salient in making your (implicit) claim that Sefardi pronuciation best preserves teh historic pronunciation of Hebrew?
As for echad, it is easy to prolong the daled if it is pronounced like a voiced th. And you are making a fundamental error in assuming the the phonology of Hebrew in the past must have similar consonants to modern arabic. E.g., how do you pronounce a soft gimel. The answer is, not the way Yemenites do under the influence of arabic. It is not a soft 'g'.
"What time and place in history do you take as salient in making your (implicit) claim that Sefardi pronunciation best preserves teh historic pronunciation of Hebrew?"- The time when both our ancestors walked the holy land and spoke an uncorrupted Hebrew (in prayer and study). Why?
"it is easy to prolong the daled if it is pronounced like a voiced th"- Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis?? "Voiced th"?
"you are making a fundamental error in assuming the the phonology of Hebrew in the past must have similar consonants to modern arabic"- It's not the exact same language (Arabic has four 'd' sounds for example), but it's a much better point of reference than Judeo-German or English. I mean, I don't even believe that Western Aramaic is that similar to Second Temple Hebrew. But it's a good point of reference.
"It is not a soft 'g'"- "Not a soft 'g'? I don't know what you mean. Either way, the consensus among almost all Sefaradim is that it's similar to the Arabic Ghain, which I obviously feel is more correct that a "ג דגושה" or a 'j' sound.
1) Ghain would be correct, but it is not how teimamin, under the influence of arabic, pronounce it.
2) Voiced th = first phoneme of "the"
3) Hebrew pronunciation differed greatly across both time and place, even within Israel. To decide who's pronunciation better reflects that of "Hebrew" you have to specify what your reference point is. Without specifying this, it is really impossible to say who today is "getting it right." That is why I ask, and why I think you need to say more than "The time when both our ancestors walked the holy land and spoke an uncorrupted Hebrew"
A few notes.
1. I believe the sephardic hebrew vowels are actually spanish, and not arabic. Listen to them, they're very similar aren't they to Spanish?
2. One of the most important functions of language, I believe, is its use as an identifier of affiliation.
3. The main threat to the Semitic character of Hebrew in our generation is English influence, not Ashkenazic Hebrew.
4. Modern day Arabic, despite undergoing westernization as well, retains many aspects of Hebrew that have gone or are going out of style, in all areas including syntax, pronunciation, and including many root words that we know from the bible and talmud, but don't use anymore. (Really no excuse for that, hebrew having so few words as it is.)
Conclusion:
All Jews should become fluent in Arabic, if for no other reason than to strengthen our own Jewish linguistic identity.
DJ: "Ghain would be correct, but it is not how teimamin, under the influence of arabic, pronounce it"- ...both the "ghain" and the "jim" are letters in Arabic. -?-
"Voiced th = first phoneme of "the""- Yes yes, but my question is WHY would a dalet have a th sound to you, not what sound the th sound makes! I ask because in the Hebraic and Arabic tradition, the soft dalet is pronounced sort of like a mix of dalet and zain.
"To decide who's pronunciation better reflects that of "Hebrew" you have to specify what your reference point is"- Don't know man. How 'bout "Pharisaic Hebrew/Aramaic pronunciation in the form in which it transferred to Bavel-Iraq.
As it happens my own grammatical opinion is that the Hebrew of the Bavliim (Iraqi Jews) was the most accurate. Which I don't think should be surprising considering that (even after the Mongol Invasion) they have a strong tradition from the Talmudic era. As for the Moroccan pronunciation; it's fine for the most part, but mimics the local tongue too much, and many Moroccans pronounce the vav like a v (should be like a w obviously).
But yeah, I think First Temple Hebrew is a bit too distant to make too many honest conclusions about. In the Second Temple period it seems they were pretty homogeneous in speech.
Sara: Why aren't you in character? : p Either way, thanks for gettin' my back here!
1. "Listen to them, they're very similar aren't they to Spanish?"- Hm. Interesting. Well, both Latin and Hebrew thrived on the Mediterranean coast while Arabic was tucked away in the desert.
I mean, I don't know if they "are" Spanish, but I agree some vowels have more in common with Spanish than Arabic (like the tzere segol and cholam. Arabic is more into the whole long and short vowel thing though. And Spanish consonants are waaay off).
2. Agreed. Which is why American Ashkenazim wouldn't start talking with ח's and ע's tomorrow morning...
3. I'm not sure I feel that way. Israeli Hebrew is also removing it from it's Semitic character by "banning" ח's and ע's. -?-
4. Also agreed. Yehudah Halevi talks about it in the Cuzari.
Conclusion: : D
>>"Ghain would be correct, but it is not how teimamin, under the influence of arabic, pronounce it"- ...both the "ghain" and the "jim" are letters in Arabic. -?-
The point is that Arabic influence can lead one to pronounce Hebrew letters differently than they should be pronounced. Yemenites are evidence of this. The fact that Arabic also represents the proper sound of a soft gimel is besides the point.
>>"Voiced th = first phoneme of "the""- Yes yes, but my question is WHY would a dalet have a th sound to you, not what sound the th sound makes! I ask because in the Hebraic and Arabic tradition, the soft dalet is pronounced sort of like a mix of dalet and zain.
Because, just as bet/vet/pay/fay form a voice/unvoiced-plosive/fricative set, so to do hard-and-soft tav/hard and soft dalet (although the tongue position does change here between hard and soft). Its not clear to me, but it doesn't seem to me that your soft dalet/soft tav pair are a voiced and unvoiced pair.
>>"To decide who's pronunciation better reflects that of "Hebrew" you have to specify what your reference point is"- Don't know man. How 'bout "Pharisaic Hebrew/Aramaic pronunciation in the form in which it transferred to Bavel-Iraq.
Why are you so keen on this locale that is outside of Israel. Anyway, I'll certainly grant you that Iraqi Hebrew may well be closest to _this_, but why should I care about this/think it makes such a mivta more superior/authenitic. _My_ mivta is closer to how it was spoken by the geonim of Eastern Europe. so what?
>>But yeah, I think First Temple Hebrew is a bit too distant to make too many honest conclusions about. In the Second Temple period it seems they were pretty homogeneous in speech.
If you like Second Temple Hebrew, there is evidence of how it was pronounced. It may or may not support your contention, but there's no reason to make arguments like "Hebrew is a middle eastern language...". Just bring the data.
I mean the divrei Elokim chaim,
G-dly words that come through the mouth of the Rebbe. Shechina mdaber mitoch grono. There's a tremendous amount of Torah that lashon kodesh was not zoche to be said in, like some of nach, gemara, virtually all of chassidus, etc.
There is kedusha in other yiddishe loshonos as well. I don't relate to/understand your pining for the language of bayis rishon.
MDJ: Sorry dude, I wrote a response, and then it got deleted. I just get so annoyed when that happens. I'm sure you've been there. Anyway,
"Arabic influence can lead one to pronounce Hebrew letters differently than they should be pronounced"- That's like saying if, when one day the English language is totally forgotten, an Arab would tell a German "Since English isn't exactly like German, it must be it sounded more like Arabic". That's untrue. It may be that English is not quite like German, but it is obviously still a Germanic language, and so German would be a much better guide to how English might have sounded than Arabic.
This is kind of similar to the situation with Latin as well; the British have Anglicized Latin. Yet Latin is an Italian language and surely sounded a lot more like today's Italian than how they pronounce Latin in all those British monasteries.
"it doesn't seem to me that your soft dalet/soft tav pair are a voiced and unvoiced pair"- All soft and hard forms of letters are different. As in the gimel. We also believe hard lamed's and mem's are doubly pronounced. There's no rule like the one you're proposing.
"Why are you so keen on this locale that is outside of Israel"- Because it happens to be more correct and because they've been the main bearers of the pre-exile tradition, in that they arrived in Iraq as intact communities, and nothing much has changed there since the Talmud was authored.
"My_ mivta is closer to how it was spoken by the geonim of Eastern Europe. so what?"- Yes, well, I don't know about you, but what I'm trying to do is pronounce Hebrew in a way that would sound plausible to it's speakers when it was yet a living language. Otherwise you're just creating some "bastard tongue", and especially when talking to G-d you want it to be a real language.
"there's no reason to make arguments like "Hebrew is a middle eastern language...". Just bring the data"- What are you saying man?? How is Hebrew NOT a middle eastern language? Is it just me or has Israel not always been in the middle east?
Menashe: "Shechina mdaber mitoch grono"- I mean, like, what if someone's reading the Old Testament in a Mandarin Bible? It's Torah, but still doesn't make it Hebrew. Jews have spoken all languages. English! More religious books are printed in English than Hebrew these days. Does that mean it's not some barbaric Viking mongrel of a language? Not to me.
"like some of nach, gemara"- Aramaic is not all that linguistically different from Hebrew (well, not as much as Judeo-German).
"There is kedusha in other yiddishe loshonos as well"- Just because Jews spoke a mispronounced German or Spanish (or Italian or Farsi or Moroccan-Arabic) doesn't make Yiddish and Ladino "holy" languages (or the Judeo-Italian, Judeo-Farsi or Judeo-Moroccan-Arabic dialects, as well as scores of other Jewish dialects sanctified either). Hebrew is the language in which G-d spoke to Man, and is the language in which we speak to Him, and it's purity must be kept!
Old English, just can't get enough of this stuff!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wl-OZ3breE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLJGTYkEKLI&feature=fvw
I actually put up a video almost exactly a year ago with some reasonably pronounced Eastern Aramaic (to give the Ashkenazim some sort of idea of how it's supposed to sound).
http://sshriki.blogspot.com/2009/02/still-holding-by-aramaic.html
No you are wrong. Any lashon that is exclusive to yidden is holy.
" "Arabic influence can lead one to pronounce Hebrew letters differently than they should be pronounced"- That's like saying if, when one day the English language is totally forgotten, an Arab would tell a German "Since English isn't exactly like German, it must be it sounded more like Arabic". That's untrue. It may be that English is not quite like German, but it is obviously still a Germanic language, and so German would be a much better guide to how English might have sounded than Arabic."
My point was (if I recall correctly, it was a while ago) that arabic influence can lead one to an incorrect pronunciation of hebrew, as the yemenite gimel shows, so you can't just take arabic, or the hebrew of arabic speaking jews, as evidence for "proper" hebrew pronuciatation
"it doesn't seem to me that your soft dalet/soft tav pair are a voiced and unvoiced pair"- All soft and hard forms of letters are different. As in the gimel. We also believe hard lamed's and mem's are doubly pronounced. There's no rule like the one you're proposing.
It's not a rule, it's a fact. The 12 BGD KFT letters form quartets (hard and soft b/f g/k and d/t) which more or less cover the voiced/unvoiced stop/plosive combination for their sites of articulation. Although there is some slippage, e.g. b/v and p/f have slightly different articulations it would seem.
"Because it happens to be more correct"
That's just what you are supposed to be proving.
"and nothing much has changed there since the Talmud was authored."
Again, an assumption, and a false one. One major change is that they have switched from speaking a persian to arabic as the local vernacular, which undoubtedly affected pronunciation. In fact, eh pronunciation of hebrew is bavel has chagned so drastically since the time of the amoraim that you almost certainly would understand little if anything of what they said. Their pronunciation was reflected in the Babylonian nikkud. This mivta had radically different vocalization of words in many respects. See Yeivin's book on this, esp. the early parts.
"My_ mivta is closer to how it was spoken by the geonim of Eastern Europe. so what?"- Yes, well, I don't know about you, but what I'm trying to do is pronounce Hebrew in a way that would sound plausible to it's speakers when it was yet a living language.
My mivta is almost certainly closer to that of the Tiberians at least, what with the same 7 vowels and a larger supply of consonants.
"there's no reason to make arguments like "Hebrew is a middle eastern language...". Just bring the data"- What are you saying man?? How is Hebrew NOT a middle eastern language? Is it just me or has Israel not always been in the middle east?
Yes, but there are serious linguists who argue that modern Hebrew ought to be classified as a European language. But my real point is, don't just say "They come from the same area/linguistic family so that's all we have to know to draw conclusions." Rather, there is a lot of direct knowledge out there about how Hebrew used to be pronounced. Use that, rather than citations to geography, to make your case.
Menashe,
No language is exclusive to Jews. Israeli Arabs speak Hebrew and many non-jews study Yiddish. They are the maid students, e.g., at the large yiddish program run by Dovid Katz in Vilnius.
1. Lashon HaKodesh is, “The Holy Language” or literally, “The Holy Tongue.” Lashon HaKodesh can therefore never be twisted into incorrect pronunciation.
The vowels and pronunciation have been so severely distorted by the Chassidim and communities of Eastern Europe, or those of ashkenazi origin - that some words have unfortunately become unrecognisable. The problem persists until today, and it must be corrected – speedily.
2. The vowels can never be mixed up - because Hashem doesn't like the sound of it.
There IS a correct way to pronounce every letter of the Aleph Bet. We are not allowed to change Hashem's Torah.
Drastically changing the pronunciation of any letter is changing Hashem's Torah - and this is something very grave.
Every letter is extremely holy. Each letter has a particular sound - like a particular note. When that sound or "note" is played incorrectly e.g. I play a piano with a hammer instead of my fingers - then great damage is caused. Damage is caused Above, and correspondingly, below.
3. In Hebrew, the vowel "A" is "a" and "U" is "u". So “Amein” is “amein”. The vowels cannot ever be twisted into “OOmein.” This is not Hebrew.
4. Especially grave – is the stubborn and continual mispronunciation of Hashem’s NAME - for centuries - by the Chassidim. This is a blatant desecration of the 3rd Commandment, and a CHILLUL HASHEM – a public desecration of THE NAME of Hashem.
The NAME of HASHEM beginning ALEPH – DALED - NUN - - which is extremely Holy - is continually mispronounced every day. The “OH” sound cannot be changed into “EE”. The 2 cannot be mixed.
It is extremely urgent for all communities to correct this. It is very dangerous for the leaders: dayanim, rabbanim and rebbeim of communities to let this continue.
There is NO forgiveness for this aveirah.
The breaking of the THIRD Commandment is UNFORGIVABLE – “LO YENAKEH.”
“Lo Tissa et SHEM Hashem Elokecha lashav ki LO YENAKEH Hashem eit asher yissa et SHEMO lashav.” (Parsha of Yitro 20:7)
“You shall not take the NAME OF HASHEM, your G-d, in vain, for HASHEM WILL NOT ABSOLVE anyone who takes His NAME in vain.”
5. “ElokeiNU” means, “Our G-d.” But the Chassidim have twisted the vowels into, “ElokIYNEE”. What does “ElokIYNEE” mean? “NU” must be pronounced as “NU”. It does not turn into “NEE.”
a) “Yerushalayim” has been changed into, “YerISHU LAYIM”. What does “YERISHU LAYIM” mean? “They will INHERIT LAYIM?”
b) “Yom Tov” has been changed into, “YON TIF”. This is not Hebrew. Hashem gave us days which are “YOM TOV” – not YON TIF.
“YOM” ends with a “Mem” not a “Nun.”
“TOV” ends with a “BET” not a “Peh.”
These are glaring examples of how Lashon HaKodesh has been distorted into words that are unintelligible.
6. The “OH” sound cannot be changed into “OY” or “OIY”. “OY” is from Polish. Lashon HaKodesh cannot be mixed with Polish.
Some examples are below:
a) The word, “Torah” has been distorted into the word, “TOIYRAH”.
b) The name of “Moshe Rabbeinu” has been distorted into the word, “MOIYSHER.” Who is MOISHER?
It is MOSHE Rabbeinu who gave us the TORAH.
Moshe did not give us the ‘TOIYRAH’, and the Torah was not given to the Jewish People by a man called ‘MOIYSHER RABAIYNU.’
The name of the greatest of all the Prophets is ‘MOSHE’. It is about time the ‘rabbis’ and ‘dayanim’ got this right.
7. The last letter of the Hebrew Alphabet is a “TAFF”. But it has been changed into a “Saf”.
“Taff” is “TE.”
It is not “Se.” It is as if someone had a bad lisp (lithp) or had some teeth missing.
The Torah was not given in Munich or Hamburg. The Jewish People came out of Egypt, which is in the Middle East. This must be corrected very urgently.
On being called up to the Torah (not TOIYrah), the correct way to say the Bracha (not ‘BRUCHA’) is:
“………..BARUCH ATAH A-D-O-Shem NOTEN HATORAH.”
– Not “Baruch AtAW Hashem NOSSEIN HATORAH.”
• The “AH” sound cannot be changed into an “AW” sound. So when a beracha is made, a person should be saying:
“Baruch AtAH….” and NOT, “Baruch ATAW……..”
8. The 8th letter of the Aleph Bet is “(G)HET”. It is guttural. It is not a “CHES.”
So a bridegroom is a (G)HATAN.
He is not a ‘CHATAN’ / ‘CHASSAN’ / ‘CHOSSON’/ ‘CHUSSON.’
9. The letter “AYIN” is guttural. The AYIN should not sound the same as the ALEPH.
The ashkenazi communities should start correcting their pronunciation.
כן, הרב דוויק, אמן ואמן ואמן, אבל אנחנו צועקים על זה שנים על גם שנים. אזניים יש להאשכנזים אבל לא ישמעו, אף להם ולא יריחון. הם באחד ומי ישיבם. ומה נעשה, אנחנו יכולים להזהיר, אבל בסופו של דבר זה תלוי בכל אחד ואחד לקבל את האמת או להישאר בחושך. אבל יישר כוחך לאורייתא על ההשתדלויות שלך אחי, יה"ר שישאו פרי
10. With regard to some Sephardi communities, such as those from Iraq:
The 6th letter of the Aleph Bet is a VAV. It is not a "WAW", as they may have been taught. "Waw" is incorrect.
The sound "WE" or "WA" is actually the NAME of Hashem.
When the 2 YUD's of Hashem's NAME are written together, the sound is "WA". However this is never pronounced. This is the only time where there is the sound "WA" in the Aleph Bet.
Here are some examples:
1. David HaMelech is "DaVID HaMelech." He is not "DaWEED HaMelech."
2. A mitzvah is a "MitzVAH." It is not a " MISSWAH " or a “MUSSWA..”
3. Mitzvot are "MitzVOT." They are not " MISSWOT " or “MUSSWOT”.
4. Mitzvotav are "MitzVOTAV." They are not "MitzWOTTAW."
SHABBAT SHALOM:
As Lashon HaKodesh is a Holy language, it cannot be mixed together with any other language. To say, “Good Shabbes!” or “Good Shabbos!” is mixing English – a Latin-based language with Lashon HaKodesh (distorted).
The correct way to greet your friend on Shabbat is to say, “Shabbat Shalom!” And with Lashon HaKodesh, a person is giving his friend the greatest greeting of all - SHALOM.
It is time that Lashon HaKodesh is pronounced correctly by all communities, both ashkenazi and sephardi.
It is especially important to make the changes to pronounce the NAME of Hashem correctly, and to begin to make a Kiddush HaSHEM in all our Tefillot.
Post a Comment