I have listened to a couple of Christian scholars of Biblical Hebrew narrate audio books on vocabulary and am curious about their pronunciation. For example, Jonathan Pennington (Old Testament Hebrew Vocabulary) says “David” as “Daa-weeth,” which is very different than the pronunciation I grew up with as an Ashkenazi Jew in the U.S.
“Daaweeth” is really “Dawidh.” B”SD
When “h” follows a consonant, it removes the daghesh (dagesh) from the previous letter like pei without a daghesh is fei, so daleth without a consonant is dhaleth, also known as a voiced “d.” These xians probably don’t realize that there are two different types of pronunciations of “th” in English, one voiced & one unvoiced. In the word “the” the “th” is voiced, but “th” at the END of word in English is ALWAYS UNVOICED, so they’ve made a mistake!!!
There is a glaring mistake in this article! The author writes,
“The most obvious differences involve the cholam: the German pronunciation is au (sounds like “ow” as in “cow”); the Galician and Hungarian pronunciation is oi (sounds like “oy” as in “toy”); and the Lithuanian pronunciation is ei (sounds like “ay” as in “lake”).”
But, in fact, it is the Litvish (Jews following the Lithuanian Jewish Tradition) that pronounce cholam as oi/oy like toy. I know because I’m an altra-orthidox Jew that speaks Hebrew according the the Litvish pronunciation and I live in a Litvish community in Jerusalem.
Although I believe your own metzius to be true (for Yerushalayim), I don’t think it’s universal.
Firstly, we have historical records of Litvish pronunciation using an /ei/. (At least according to YIVO, which does a lot of historic work with Yiddish and Ashkenazi Hebrew: https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Language/Hebrew)
Secondly, I’ve spent a lot of time around Lubavitchers (read: “Litvish Chassidim”), and they still pronounce the cholam as /ei/. In fact, they still appear to be teaching their children this pronunciation, even as Yiddish is falling by the wayside by them. (Here’s an example: https://www.chabad.org/multimedia/music_cdo/aid/982066/jewish/Bereishis.htm)
However, I’ve also found that many (probably most) North American Litvishers appear to have also shifted their pronunciation to /oi/.
This reminds me of the Litvish pronunciation of shin as /s/ (the famous “Litviser Sprach”), which appears to have also gone extinct.
Although I believe your own metzius to be true (for Yerushalayim), I don’t think that it’s universal.
Firstly, we have historical records of Litvish pronunciation using an /ei/. (At least according to YIVO, which does a lot of historic work with Yiddish and Ashkenazi Hebrew: https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Language/Hebrew)
However, many (probably most) North American Litvishers appear to have also shifted their pronunciation to /oi/.
This reminds me of the old Litvish pronunciation of shin as /s/ (the famous “Litviser Sprach”), which appears to also have gone extinct
I am a little nonplussed that you think that what goes on currently in EY reflects what the reality was in Europe.
“Litvish” refers to the pronunciation of people identified as Litvaks in Europe. All of them, whether they lived in the countries called Lithuania, Poland, Belarus or Ukrainia after WWII,, pronounced the holam as /ey/.
The groups that call themselves Litvish in EY nowadays may be descendents of Litvaks from Europe or to to “Litvish” yeshivos, but no Litvak from Europe would recognize them. Not only because of their pronunciation, but various customs that they have changed. You might even be able still to find some Litvaks from Europe who could tell you.
There are recordings of RYBS, R MF, R Aharon Kotler and others available that one can listen to, and verify to onesself that my statements are true. I don’t know if there are recordings of R. Chatzkel Sarna, but I heard him speak, and he also spoke about “Teyroh.”
It is one of the very peculiar things that Jews descended from Litvaks and Jews who learned in Litvish yeshivos, both in EY and in the United States, abandoned some of the customs of their ancestors and forebears and their pronunciations.
Another example that comes as a shock to people who consider themselves “Litvish” nowadays is that no Litvaks “shockled” while davening. Some may have swayed slowly, but no more. I can attest that none of the RY in Chevron in the 70’s shockled.
The reason for the changes is sociological, not linguistic.
Thank you Rabbi Seth I just published a book called “We are Israel” and it speaks of the origin of the British and American peoples, while I was in the act of writing the book my research lead me to delve into the original Hebrew, and I was shocked and surprised to discover that much of the ancient Hebrew sounded English, further investigation has convinced me that indeed English is Hebrew, even William Tyndale, said it, “the properties of the Hebrew tongue aggreeth a thousand times more with the English than with the Latin. The manner of speaking is in both one, so that, in a thousand places, there needest not but to translate the Hebrew word for word.”
Let me give you some translations, from the many thousands I have discovered.
Let’s take the phrase “God’s chosen people.” (I literally just translated this one), the word God come from Holy, not from eL which now sounds like hell, and comes from Kill (H3622 כְּלוּהַי Kĕluwhay, pass away, kill and hell, chelluh, see also H3637 כָּלַם kalam, figurative, H3632 כָּלִיל kaliyl (Kiyl), sacrifice entirely consumed, also H7585 שְׁאוֹל sHĕ’owl and Satan, 1966 הֵילֵל H(y)ell). God comes from Qod’s (H6944 קֹדֶשׁ QD’s’h, holy, see also H1433, גֹּדֶל GoD’L, Gods, mercy, greatness, might). Chosen, comes from the High Priest, breast plate he is the chosen one, also seer’s are chosen by God.( h2833 חֹשֶׁן choshen, H2374 חֹזֶה chozeh-seer). America, God’s chosen people, the name for God’s people in Hebrew is Am·me·ḵā, (H5971 עַמֶּֽךָ׃‘ am·me·ḵā, see also Ammi עַמִּ֜י).
Sir I have discovered thousands of Englsih/Hebrew root, words, and thats how I can take one phrase and come up with answers, here are some more. Savior, Isaiah, H3470 יְשַׁעְיָה Ye’Sha`Yah, God saves. God who is man – Emmanuel, I, man, u’eL, (H6005 עִמָּנוּאֵל ʻIm’mân’ûwʼêl, im-maw-noo-ale’-A’man’u’eL).
Even the name Israel, can be reproduced in English, although I can go into a very lengthy discourse explaining, the many intricate weavings from this name and related name’s, I will just say this, Jacob was given the name Israel after he contended with God and won, it was a royal honor, and his name mean’s the same, i.e., contend with God, and to rule with God, e.g. His Royal Highness – H3478 יִשְׂרָאֵל Yisrâʼêl, yis-raw-ale’; from H8280 and H410; he will rule as God; Jisraël, a symbolical name of Jacob; also (typically) of his posterity, Israel, comes from שָׂרָה H8280 sârâh, saw-raw’; a primitive root; to prevail, have power (as a prince), Sir also comes from this root.
Sir I hope we can work together to uncover more mysteries and reveal the true original Hebrew.
Please contact me at dpm@des1.com or dpm@hts-us.com.
My dear sir,
As I point out in my article, the pronuciation of the “true original Hebrew” depends on what you define that to be. The Hebrew spoken by Yaaqov? The Hebrew spoken by Moshe Rabbenu? The Hebrew spoken by King David?
I can assure you (as much as a human can assure) that they were all quite different.
Even in the time of King David, the northern tribes spoke quite differently than the southern tribes. The northern tribes probably prounced the letter “sin” as /sh/, and only the letter “samekh” as /s/, like their neighbors who lived in Tyre and Sidon, which lies behind the Biblical story in Judges 12:4, when Jepfthah identified people from the tribe of Ephraim from the people of Gil’ad. (The idea that they could not pronounce the sound /sh/ has no basis and is contrary to all evidence, and was put forward by people who were familiar with Greek and Latin, but not with Semitic languages.)
According to modern historical linguistics—taking into account Semitic comparative phonology, regional spelling differences corresponding to dialect, and probable phonetic influence from languages surrounding Shomron (Samaria)—the northern tribes probably retained the proto-Semitic phoneme “th”, as opposed to the merger of “th” with Shin that occured in every other dialect of proto-Hebrew. Therefore, while mainstream dialects pronounced שבלת as “Shibbult”, northerners would have pronounced it as “Thibbult”. Southerners, not knowing how to pronounce “th”, would try to reproduce it with the closest sound that they *could* make: “s”. Ergo, “Sibbult”(–>”Sibbolet”). (This same phenomenon is actually what caused Ashkenazim to pronounce soft ת as “s”: In Masoretic Hebrew, it was pronounced “th”, but the later German Jews didn’t know how to pronounce “th”, and the closest sound was “s”.)
I am reading this because I hear a difference between Israeli modern Hebrew and what I hear in synagogue. Israeli friends note American synagogue Hebrew sounds very strange, emphasis on “wrong ” syllables.
They understand the words, so it does not appear to be a difference like Chaucer’s middle English and modern English. That surprised me. I assumed they were having trouble with hearing an ancient Hebrew with modern ears.
To be fair, neither of these friends spent much time in synagogue when they lived in Israel.
1. Suggested readings please on this topic.
2. Why does it not matter to Jewish leaders that they are not speaking Hebrew that is intelligible and conversational?
3. Am I over generalizing?
4. Do I need a check?
What you are describing is not that surprising. If all you ever heard was contemporary Australian English, and then you were dropped into a room of Bostonians reciting Shakespeare’s sonnets, you would also think that it sounds very strange and with emphasis on the wrong syllables.
American synagogue attendees are using a liturgical language for ceremonial purposes with a distinctive American accent and they are generally not proficient in Modern Conversational Hebrew; Israeli Hebrew is a living modern language with its own formal pronunciation (and with variations on the formal pronunciation that are associated with different social/cultural groups.)
You’re not overgeneralizing, and there must be linguists that study these things, but it’s not a big deal in everyday life.
It’s wrong to say that there’s “no way” to figure out which accent most closely resembles ancient Hebrew. We have mountains upon mountains of linguistic evidence, including entire books about pronunciation written by the Masoretes themselves. We know exactly how every consonant except ר was pronounced in Biblical Hebrew, Rabbinic Hebrew, and each Masoretic tradition. We know what the Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew phonemes were, and we know the precise phonetic values of the vowels in each Masoretic system. For the most part, we can trace the evolution of all modern reading traditions to the three major Masoretic traditions. It’s absolutely clear which aspects of which accent are more authentic.
I have listened to a couple of Christian scholars of Biblical Hebrew narrate audio books on vocabulary and am curious about their pronunciation. For example, Jonathan Pennington (Old Testament Hebrew Vocabulary) says “David” as “Daa-weeth,” which is very different than the pronunciation I grew up with as an Ashkenazi Jew in the U.S.
“Daaweeth” is really “Dawidh.” B”SD
When “h” follows a consonant, it removes the daghesh (dagesh) from the previous letter like pei without a daghesh is fei, so daleth without a consonant is dhaleth, also known as a voiced “d.” These xians probably don’t realize that there are two different types of pronunciations of “th” in English, one voiced & one unvoiced. In the word “the” the “th” is voiced, but “th” at the END of word in English is ALWAYS UNVOICED, so they’ve made a mistake!!!
I don’t understand your comment, “th” when at the end of an English word is silent? Wrath, you pronounce the “th”, am I missing something?
No. Not silent, but unvoiced. Notice the difference in the “th” sound in myth and them (or meth and them).
There is a glaring mistake in this article! The author writes,
“The most obvious differences involve the cholam: the German pronunciation is au (sounds like “ow” as in “cow”); the Galician and Hungarian pronunciation is oi (sounds like “oy” as in “toy”); and the Lithuanian pronunciation is ei (sounds like “ay” as in “lake”).”
But, in fact, it is the Litvish (Jews following the Lithuanian Jewish Tradition) that pronounce cholam as oi/oy like toy. I know because I’m an altra-orthidox Jew that speaks Hebrew according the the Litvish pronunciation and I live in a Litvish community in Jerusalem.
Although I believe your own metzius to be true (for Yerushalayim), I don’t think it’s universal.
Firstly, we have historical records of Litvish pronunciation using an /ei/. (At least according to YIVO, which does a lot of historic work with Yiddish and Ashkenazi Hebrew: https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Language/Hebrew)
Secondly, I’ve spent a lot of time around Lubavitchers (read: “Litvish Chassidim”), and they still pronounce the cholam as /ei/. In fact, they still appear to be teaching their children this pronunciation, even as Yiddish is falling by the wayside by them. (Here’s an example: https://www.chabad.org/multimedia/music_cdo/aid/982066/jewish/Bereishis.htm)
However, I’ve also found that many (probably most) North American Litvishers appear to have also shifted their pronunciation to /oi/.
This reminds me of the Litvish pronunciation of shin as /s/ (the famous “Litviser Sprach”), which appears to have also gone extinct.
Although I believe your own metzius to be true (for Yerushalayim), I don’t think that it’s universal.
Firstly, we have historical records of Litvish pronunciation using an /ei/. (At least according to YIVO, which does a lot of historic work with Yiddish and Ashkenazi Hebrew: https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Language/Hebrew)
Secondly, I’ve spent a lot of time around Lubavitchers (read: “Litvish Chassidim”), and they pronounce the cholam as /ei/. In fact, they still appear to be teaching their children this pronunciation. (Here’s an example: https://www.chabad.org/multimedia/music_cdo/aid/982066/jewish/Bereishis.htm)
However, many (probably most) North American Litvishers appear to have also shifted their pronunciation to /oi/.
This reminds me of the old Litvish pronunciation of shin as /s/ (the famous “Litviser Sprach”), which appears to also have gone extinct
I am a little nonplussed that you think that what goes on currently in EY reflects what the reality was in Europe.
“Litvish” refers to the pronunciation of people identified as Litvaks in Europe. All of them, whether they lived in the countries called Lithuania, Poland, Belarus or Ukrainia after WWII,, pronounced the holam as /ey/.
The groups that call themselves Litvish in EY nowadays may be descendents of Litvaks from Europe or to to “Litvish” yeshivos, but no Litvak from Europe would recognize them. Not only because of their pronunciation, but various customs that they have changed. You might even be able still to find some Litvaks from Europe who could tell you.
There are recordings of RYBS, R MF, R Aharon Kotler and others available that one can listen to, and verify to onesself that my statements are true. I don’t know if there are recordings of R. Chatzkel Sarna, but I heard him speak, and he also spoke about “Teyroh.”
It is one of the very peculiar things that Jews descended from Litvaks and Jews who learned in Litvish yeshivos, both in EY and in the United States, abandoned some of the customs of their ancestors and forebears and their pronunciations.
Another example that comes as a shock to people who consider themselves “Litvish” nowadays is that no Litvaks “shockled” while davening. Some may have swayed slowly, but no more. I can attest that none of the RY in Chevron in the 70’s shockled.
The reason for the changes is sociological, not linguistic.
Thank you Rabbi Seth I just published a book called “We are Israel” and it speaks of the origin of the British and American peoples, while I was in the act of writing the book my research lead me to delve into the original Hebrew, and I was shocked and surprised to discover that much of the ancient Hebrew sounded English, further investigation has convinced me that indeed English is Hebrew, even William Tyndale, said it, “the properties of the Hebrew tongue aggreeth a thousand times more with the English than with the Latin. The manner of speaking is in both one, so that, in a thousand places, there needest not but to translate the Hebrew word for word.”
Let me give you some translations, from the many thousands I have discovered.
Let’s take the phrase “God’s chosen people.” (I literally just translated this one), the word God come from Holy, not from eL which now sounds like hell, and comes from Kill (H3622 כְּלוּהַי Kĕluwhay, pass away, kill and hell, chelluh, see also H3637 כָּלַם kalam, figurative, H3632 כָּלִיל kaliyl (Kiyl), sacrifice entirely consumed, also H7585 שְׁאוֹל sHĕ’owl and Satan, 1966 הֵילֵל H(y)ell).
God comes from Qod’s (H6944 קֹדֶשׁ QD’s’h, holy, see also H1433, גֹּדֶל GoD’L, Gods, mercy, greatness, might).
Chosen, comes from the High Priest, breast plate he is the chosen one, also seer’s are chosen by God.( h2833 חֹשֶׁן choshen, H2374 חֹזֶה chozeh-seer).
America, God’s chosen people, the name for God’s people in Hebrew is Am·me·ḵā, (H5971 עַמֶּֽךָ׃‘ am·me·ḵā, see also Ammi עַמִּ֜י).
Sir I have discovered thousands of Englsih/Hebrew root, words, and thats how I can take one phrase and come up with answers, here are some more.
Savior, Isaiah, H3470 יְשַׁעְיָה Ye’Sha`Yah, God saves.
God who is man – Emmanuel, I, man, u’eL, (H6005 עִמָּנוּאֵל ʻIm’mân’ûwʼêl, im-maw-noo-ale’-A’man’u’eL).
Even the name Israel, can be reproduced in English, although I can go into a very lengthy discourse explaining, the many intricate weavings from this name and related name’s, I will just say this, Jacob was given the name Israel after he contended with God and won, it was a royal honor, and his name mean’s the same, i.e., contend with God, and to rule with God, e.g. His Royal Highness – H3478 יִשְׂרָאֵל Yisrâʼêl, yis-raw-ale’; from H8280 and H410; he will rule as God; Jisraël, a symbolical name of Jacob; also (typically) of his posterity, Israel, comes from שָׂרָה H8280 sârâh, saw-raw’; a primitive root; to prevail, have power (as a prince), Sir also comes from this root.
Sir I hope we can work together to uncover more mysteries and reveal the true original Hebrew.
Please contact me at dpm@des1.com or dpm@hts-us.com.
My dear sir,
As I point out in my article, the pronuciation of the “true original Hebrew” depends on what you define that to be. The Hebrew spoken by Yaaqov? The Hebrew spoken by Moshe Rabbenu? The Hebrew spoken by King David?
I can assure you (as much as a human can assure) that they were all quite different.
Even in the time of King David, the northern tribes spoke quite differently than the southern tribes. The northern tribes probably prounced the letter “sin” as /sh/, and only the letter “samekh” as /s/, like their neighbors who lived in Tyre and Sidon, which lies behind the Biblical story in Judges 12:4, when Jepfthah identified people from the tribe of Ephraim from the people of Gil’ad. (The idea that they could not pronounce the sound /sh/ has no basis and is contrary to all evidence, and was put forward by people who were familiar with Greek and Latin, but not with Semitic languages.)
According to modern historical linguistics—taking into account Semitic comparative phonology, regional spelling differences corresponding to dialect, and probable phonetic influence from languages surrounding Shomron (Samaria)—the northern tribes probably retained the proto-Semitic phoneme “th”, as opposed to the merger of “th” with Shin that occured in every other dialect of proto-Hebrew. Therefore, while mainstream dialects pronounced שבלת as “Shibbult”, northerners would have pronounced it as “Thibbult”. Southerners, not knowing how to pronounce “th”, would try to reproduce it with the closest sound that they *could* make: “s”. Ergo, “Sibbult”(–>”Sibbolet”). (This same phenomenon is actually what caused Ashkenazim to pronounce soft ת as “s”: In Masoretic Hebrew, it was pronounced “th”, but the later German Jews didn’t know how to pronounce “th”, and the closest sound was “s”.)
I am reading this because I hear a difference between Israeli modern Hebrew and what I hear in synagogue. Israeli friends note American synagogue Hebrew sounds very strange, emphasis on “wrong ” syllables.
They understand the words, so it does not appear to be a difference like Chaucer’s middle English and modern English. That surprised me. I assumed they were having trouble with hearing an ancient Hebrew with modern ears.
To be fair, neither of these friends spent much time in synagogue when they lived in Israel.
1. Suggested readings please on this topic.
2. Why does it not matter to Jewish leaders that they are not speaking Hebrew that is intelligible and conversational?
3. Am I over generalizing?
4. Do I need a check?
What you are describing is not that surprising. If all you ever heard was contemporary Australian English, and then you were dropped into a room of Bostonians reciting Shakespeare’s sonnets, you would also think that it sounds very strange and with emphasis on the wrong syllables.
American synagogue attendees are using a liturgical language for ceremonial purposes with a distinctive American accent and they are generally not proficient in Modern Conversational Hebrew; Israeli Hebrew is a living modern language with its own formal pronunciation (and with variations on the formal pronunciation that are associated with different social/cultural groups.)
You’re not overgeneralizing, and there must be linguists that study these things, but it’s not a big deal in everyday life.
It’s wrong to say that there’s “no way” to figure out which accent most closely resembles ancient Hebrew. We have mountains upon mountains of linguistic evidence, including entire books about pronunciation written by the Masoretes themselves. We know exactly how every consonant except ר was pronounced in Biblical Hebrew, Rabbinic Hebrew, and each Masoretic tradition. We know what the Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew phonemes were, and we know the precise phonetic values of the vowels in each Masoretic system. For the most part, we can trace the evolution of all modern reading traditions to the three major Masoretic traditions. It’s absolutely clear which aspects of which accent are more authentic.