Page images
PDF
EPUB

and to preclude the necessity of dividing words by a hyphen or otherwise at the end, which is never done in Hebrew.

9. The forms of several of the letters so nearly resemble each other, that they require to be carefully discriminated by the learner at the outset. Let him note their differences as exhibited in the following table :—

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

The Hebrews made use of the letters of the alphabet, in order to denote numbers. For this purpose they divided the letters (including the final ones) into three classes, the first denoting units, the second tens, the third hundreds, in this manner :

טין

[blocks in formation]

Beyond ten they joined a decimal and a unit, thus:

[ocr errors]

11; 2, 12;

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

' 32; ', 41; ', 42, &c. For fifteen they always employed 9 +6 15, and not П, because this last is the contraction for the word in Jehovah. Beyond a hundred their numerals were constructed in the same manner; as p, 101, p, 102, p, 103, &c. To express thousands and higher numbers they began the alphabet anew, placing two dots over each letter; thus 1000, 2000, 3000, &c.

1838.

Note. This mode of enumeration is not found in the Hebrew Bible, where numbers are always expressed in words, but it is important to be known, as being the method employed by the Masorites, and adopted by Buxtorf in the citation of chapters and verses in his excellent Hebrew Concordance, the value of which, however, would have been greater had he chosen the method by figures.

§4. CLASSIFICATION OF THE CONSONANTS.

pronun

1. A very natural distinction of the consonants in all languages is one founded on the different organs upon which their ciation mainly depends. Letters of the same organ are obviously more closely related to each other than those of different organs, so that if a commutation of one for another should ever take place, we should more naturally look for it to occur between letters of a kindred order than between those which have no mutual vocal affinity. Thus, for example, the substitution of the labial for p

is more natural than that of for 1, or of for the lingual, or the sibilant . And such we find to be the actual usage of the language. Words of the same signification are found with different letters, but mostly those belonging to the same organ: as,,, back; and to escape; and to shut up; and to exult. The classification, therefore, founded upon this relation is the following:

[blocks in formation]

2. Illustrations of the practical utility of this division are to be derived rather from the department of lexicography than of grammar, although some further use will be made of it in § 24. In the mean time, a classification more immediately useful to the learner is one which selects those letters only that are the subjects of some important peculiarity, as,

(a). The GUTTURALS: viz., §, ♬,,, to which also is closely related from its so frequently conforming to the usages of this class (§ 25). These letters are distinguished by a mode of vowel-pointing and other peculiarities hereafter to be specified (§ 25). Meanwhile they should be thoroughly impressed upon the memory.

(b) The ASPIRATES; viz. 3, 7, 7, 2, 5,, technically termed Begadh-Kephath (2).* They are called Aspirates from the

The technical word in this and similar cases is intended merely as a help to the memory. Such terms are a device of Rabbinic origin, and are largely employed in the older Hebrew Grammars.

fact, that when they occur without a Dagesh-point in the centre (§ 12), an aspirate or h-sound is associated with them in pronunciation. Thus bh, i. e. v, which is regarded as vocally equivalent to

=

1

[ocr errors]

v, while a=b; 7th in though,* while 7= d; ph, while = p ; =th in think, while =t. As to the two remaining Aspirates ♬ and, although the insertion of the point makes theoretically the same difference, yet as our organs are not capable of expressing it, it is not practically regarded.

(c) The QUIESCENTS: viz. N, 7, 7, 7, technically termed Ehevi (1). They are so called from their easily losing their appropriate consonant sound, and quiescing in or coalescing with the preceding vowel. Thus in râ the & quiesces in the vowel-sound indicated by the mark under ", the syllable being pronounced precisely as it would be were the omitted. So in meh quiesces in the vowel-sound pertaining to ; in 3 lo in that of; inne in that of 1. This is closely analogous to such cases as low, lie, shawl, &c., in English. A fuller account of these letters will be given after the student has become acquainted with the vowel-system, § 18.

[ocr errors]

and

(d) The SIBILANTS, viz. O, Y, Z, . It will be sufficient here barely to specify the letters belonging to this class. The peculiarity by which they are marked will be explained hereafter, § 23. 4. (e) The LIQUIDS; viz. 3, 1, 3, These also are often interchanged for each other, as 7 and to oppress; Achan or Achar, pr. name. (f) The Radicals and Serviles. This is a distinction founded on the fact, that nearly all the words in Hebrew are reducible to triliteral or biliteral roots, the derivatives from which are often augmented by additional letters. Under the Radicals therefore are included those letters which occur in the roots only, while the Serviles comprise those which are made to serve as prefixes, suffixes, &c. in the various modifications which nouns and verbs undergo in the course of formation and flexion. The latter class is composed of the following letters, , 2, 1, 7, 7, 5, 3, 12, 1, 2, , which are often arranged for memorial purposes into the words Ethan, Moses, and Caleb. On the other hand, no letter of the alphabet is

It is peculiarly important that the learner, in pronouncing the aspirate, accustom himself to give it the precise sound of th in though, this, that, instead of the sound of th in think, thin, which is expressed by n.

excluded from the list of Radicals, although the following, including the remaining half of the alphabet, are never used as Serviles, viz. 1, 7, 1, 77, 0, 0, 1, 5, 1, p, .

CHAPTER II.

§ 5. HEBREW VOWEL SYSTEM.

1. Preliminary Remarks.-The obvious phenomena of the Hebrew language in its existing state clearly go to prove, that it must have been a spoken before it became a written language. This is to be inferred mainly, from the fact that consonants only, the more firm, prominent, and indispensable elements of speech, are written. It is indeed difficult for us, in the present improved state of the art of writing, to conceive how words should be exhibited by consonants alone without the aid of vowels, yet the fact that such was the case is indubitable, and on the supposition above mentioned, that the language was familiar to the ear before it was addressed to the eye, the fact is easily accounted for. As consonants are to words what the bones are, to the human body, or the frame-work to a building, so whenever these first elements of speech were written, the requisite vowel-sounds were at once suggested to the mind of the reader, and no difficulty was experienced in coming at the idea intended to be conveyed. To a Shemitic eye the characters

lmd, brk, sounds' which

dor, mshpt, would immediately suggest the vowel common usage associated with them in their full enunciation. So, in fact, in many instances in English, the utterance of short syllables is so rapid, that the nicest ear can scarcely distinguish what vowel the speaker or reader has employed. As far, for example, as the enunciation of the vowel in the last syllable of the word is concerned, father, falhir, fathar, fathur, fathyr, fathor, are all in effect the same. In some cases the vowel is entirely lost, as in bason, mason, lesson, lessen. Experiment indeed will convince us, that in common pronunciation we habitually expel almost all the short vowels to such a degree, that if we place by themselves the consonants which compose the word, omitting the vowels, we shall still be able to enunciate the combinations about as easily as if the vowels were present. Let the following serve as an example:

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

These instances, which might be indefinitely muliplied, will be sufficient to`show, that combinations of consonants, quite as complex as any thing that appears in Hebrew, may be easily read without vowels. Indeed, in the art of stenography the principle of the Hebrew is actually practised upon every day.

2. Still it is evident that this was an imperfect mode of writing, and that cases would occur in which it would be absolutely necessary to express the vowel sounds; e. g. when two such sounds came together, as in hoi, -3 galui, &c. The native and inherent tendency, moreover, of all languages to a more perfect developement would gradually work a change in this respect, and writers would become accustomed to insert some kind of vowel signs in the places where they seemed most indispensable. But instead of inventing entirely new signs for this purpose, the first step seems to have been to employ a class of the consonants whose sound naturally approached most nearly to that of Vowels. These were the so called matres lectionis (,,,), particularly the two last. The consonant sounds of and are little more than a hardening of the vowels u and i (§ 7. 1.), and were therefore most frequently used for these vowel sounds, though occasionally for o and e. The letter likewise was sometimes used to express the vowel a, especially its long sound, as in pqam, ramoth, rash, but this very seldom, since a, as the most native of all the vowel sounds, requires least of all to be distinguished and signified in writing. Where no vowel was expressed, as in 3p, p, p, &c., a would more naturally than any other be understood as due of course.

3. The wants of a written language, however, were but imperfectly supplied in the expedient above mentioned. It formed but a distant approach to a regular systematic vocalization. More especially would its deficiencies be felt in proportion as the Hebrew ceased to be a spoken language. It then became an object to adopt some method by which the reading and understanding of the sacred text might be rendered easy and certain, and at the same time be permanently and immutably fixed. But this object was not to be effected by a further developement of the alphabet; for the basis of the ancient mode of writing, representing the firmer and more essential elements of words, was considered as sacred and inviolable. An entirely new and independent device was to be adopted, and the result is before us in the very remarkable system of punctuation which has become inseparably interwoven with the text of the Hebrew Scriptures. By a somewhat complicated, but extremely ingenious apparatus of fine points and strokes, not only are the ancient sounds of the language even in their more delicate shades and relations preserved, but also a very ample commentary for the interpretation of the sense afforded.

4. "In like manner, should our own language ever become extinct, it is evident that our very anomalous pronunciation of its vowels could only be recorded to posterity by diacritical points. Take for example the sentence, 'When the troubled móther bírd héard hér yóung chírp, she húrried back without farther delay.' In these few words we have the vowels a, e, i, o, u, and the dipthongs ea and ou, where we have placed the accent, all pronounced identi cally. The method which we should adopt to preserve this pronunciation is just the method which has been adopted for a similar purpose in the Hebrew.

5. The precise date to which this invention is to be referred it is impossible, from the absence of historical data, to fix with certainty. Nor are we any more able to determine the author or authors to whom the credit of it is due. Prevailing opinion indeed assigns the system, if not in its origin, at least in its completion, to a school of Rabbis, who flourished at Tiberias in Palestine,

« PreviousContinue »