DOCSLIB.ORG

A History of the Hebrew Language

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A History of the Hebrew Language EDUARD YECHEZKEL KUTSCHER A HISTORY OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE Edited by RAPHAEL KUTSCHER 1982 THE MAGNES PRESS, THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY, JERUSALEM E.J. BRILL, LEIDEN Published with the assistance of the Louis and Minna Epstein Fund of the American Academy for Jewish Research Distributed by N.V. Boekhandel en Drukkerij V/H E.J. Brill, Oudc Rijn 33a, Leiden Holland © The Magnes Press, The Hebrew University Jerusalem 1982 ISBN 965-223-397-8 Printed in Israel at “Ahva” Co. Press, Jerusalem TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxv EDITOR’S FOREWORD xxix C hapter O n e : THE BACKGROUND. § 1 1 C hapter T w o : THE SEMITIC LANGUAGES. §2 3 C hapter T h r e e : HEBREW AS A SEMITIC LANGUAGE ... 5 A. What Is a Semitic Language? §3 5 I. Consonant-VowelRelationship. §4 5 II. Roots. §5 I 6 a. Patterns o f the Semitic Root. §6 6 B. Guttural (Laryngal and Pharyngal) and Emphatic Consonants. §7 7 hf). §8 7 ,’/) א, ה I. The Laryngals λ §9 8/״/Α/) ח, ע II. The Pharyngals s, qf). §10 8 ,//) ט, ,צ, ק III. The Emphatics C. Vowels. §11 8 D. Morphology * 8 I. Pronouns and Particles. §12 8 II. The Verb. §13 9 III. The Noun. §14 10 \V .Attributes of the Noun. §15 10 E. Syntax. §16 10 C hapter F o u r: BIBLICAL HEBREW 12 A. Tripartite Division of Biblical Hebrew. § 17 12 B. Methods of Presentation. §18 12 C. Phonology 12 I. Consonants. §19 12 a. Sibilants. §20 13 sf). §21 14/) ס sf) and/) ש T h e Merger o f. 1 2. The Sibbolet-Sibbolet Incident. §22 14 3. The Pronunciation of the Sibilants by Diaspora Jews as a Reflection of Their Respective Languages. §23 15 b, Gutturals. §24 17 in Greek Transliterations. §25 . 17 (/ ״/( ע h / and/) ח .1 2. The M erger o f Ix l with /h / and Igl with /'/. §26 . 18 3. The Weak Pronunciation of the Gutturals. §27 . 18 4. Refutation o f Kahle*s Theory o f Gutturals. §28 . 19 g, d, k, p ,tf). §29 21 ,<//) ב, ג, ד, כ, פ, ת c. The 1. Refutation of Kahle*s Theory of the /b, g, d, k, p, t/. §30 21 II. Vowels 22 a. The Proto-Semitic Long Vowels in BH. §31 22 1. Proto-Semitic I a:/ in BH. §32 23 a. Bauer's “Mixed Language” Theory. §33 . 23 ß. The /a :/> /0 :/ Shift in Cuneiform Trans- literation. §34 24 b. The Proto-Semitic Short Vowels in BH. §35 25 1. Stress as a Distinctive Feature. §36 26 2. Λ Sound-Change Attested During Three Thousand Years in Syria-Palestine. §37 26 3. Proto-Semitic Short //, u! in BH . §38 29 4. Vowel Length as a Distinctive Feature in BH. §39 29 D. Morphology 30 I. Indepdendent Pronouns 30 a. First Person Singular. §40 30 b. Second Person Feminine Singular. §41 30 c. First Person Plural. §42 31 d. Second and Third Persons Plural (Masc. and F em .).§ 43 31 II. Demonstrative Pronouns. §44 31 III. Relative Pronouns. §45 32 IV. The Possessive Suffix of the Second Person Masculine Singular. §46 32 V. The Verb 35 a . Stems. §47 35 1. Passive Qal. §48 36 2. Nifal. §49 36 3. Ifte'al. §50 37 b. Tenses. §51 37 1. Suffixes of the Perfect 37 a. Second Person Singular Masculine. § 52 .. 37 ß. Second Person Singular Feminine. §53 ... 37 P1. “Mirage”Forms. §54 38 y. Third Person Singular Feminine. §55 . ... 39 δ. Third Person Plural Feminine. §56 39 2. Prefixes and Suffixes o f the Imperfect. §57 .... 40 a. Second Person Singular Feminine and Second and Third Persons Plural Masculine. §58 40 β. Third Person Plural Feminine. §59 41 c. Active and Neutral Bases in the Qal 42 1. Perfect. §60 42 2. Imperfect. §61 42 3. Participle. §62 42 d. The W eak Verbs 42 Verbs. §63 42 ל "י) ל ״ ה 0( ^ ל״א .1 Verbs. §64 43 ע״ י and ע״ו.2 IV. The Noun. §65 43 E. Syntax 44 I. Syntax of the Verb in SBH. § 6 6 44 II. Syntax of the Verb in LBH. §67 45 III. Infinitives and Participles. § 6 8 45 F. Vocabulary 46 I. Foreign Loanwords. §69 46 a. How Is a Foreign Loanword Recognized? §70 .... 46 47 י. b. Wanderwörter (Travelling Words). §71 c. Akkadian and Sumerian Loanwords 48 1. Akkadian. §72 48 2. Sum erian. §73 50 d. Egyptian Loanwords. §74 . 51 e. Persian Loanwords. §75 52 f Loanwords from Other Languages. §76 52 g. Aramaic Loanwords ......................................................... 53 \\. The Native Vocabulary ......................................................... 53 a. The Vocabulary as a Reflection of Jewish Life. §77 . 53 b. Topographical Terms. §78 .................................... .. 54 1. Dialectal Differences? §79 .................................... 54 c. Thorns and Thistles. §80 ................................................ 55 d. “All the Fountains of the Great Deep and the Flood Gates o f the Sky”. §81 ................................................... 55 e. The Desert. §82 ........................ ....................................... 56 f Translation and Transculturation. §83 ........................ 56 g. Diachronic Investigation. §84 ....................................... 57 h. The Evidence fro m Place Names. §85 ......................... 57 1. Sound Changes in Places Names. § 8 6 .................. 59 2. Canaanite Deities in Places Names. §87 ............ 59 3. Place Names in Word Plays. § 8 8 ........................... 60 /. Personal Names. §89 ...................................................... 60 1. Personal Names Preserving Old Grammatical Forms. §90 ................................................................... 62 2. Special Vocabulary in Personal Names. § 91 . 63 G. Inscriptions. §92 ............................................................................ 64 I. Spelling. §93 ............................................................................... 65 II. Phonology. §94 ......................................................................... 66 III. Morphology. §95 .................................................................. 66 IV. Vocabulary. §96 ................................................................... 67 H. Hebrew Words in Akkadian Transliteration. §97 .................. 68 I. Hebrew Loanwords in Foreign Languages. §98 ..................... 68 J. Dialects of Biblical Hebrew. §99 ................................................ 70 K. The Aramaic Influence. § 100 ................................................... 71 I. In Phonology. §101 ................................................................... 73 II. In Morphology ......................................................................... 74 III. /Λ2 § 104 ..................................................................... 75 a. In the Verb. §102 ............................................................ 74 b. In the Noun. §103 ............................................................ 74 IV. In the Vocabulary. § 105 ...................................................... 75 a. Aram aic Caiques. § 106 ................................................... 76 L. Stratification of Biblical Hebrew (and El-Amarna). § 107 . 77 I. The El-Amama Glosses. § 108 ............................................. 77 a. Phonology. §109 .......................................................... 78 b. Morphology. § 110 ............................................................ 78 II. Archaic Biblical Hebrew. §111 .......................................... 79 a. Morphology. §112 ............................................................ 79 1. The Verb. §113 ......................................................... 79 2. The Noun. §114 ......................................................... 79 b. Syntax. § 115 ..................................................................... 80 c. Vocabulary. §116 ............................................................ 80 III. Late Biblical Hebrew. § 117 ................................................. 81 a. Spelling. § 118 .................................................................. 81 b. Pronouns. §119 ............................................................... 81 c. The Verb. §120 .................................................................. 81 d. The Noun. §121 ............................................................... 81 e. Syntax of the Verb and Noun. § 122 ........................... 82 f. Vocabulary. §123 ............................................................. 82 g. LBH Features not Found in Mishnaic Hebrew. § 124 84 1. A Canaanite Construction. §125 ........................... 85 M. Conclusions. § 126 ........................................................................ 85 C hapter F7ve: THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND CONTEMPORARY SOURCES ........................... 87 A. The Book of Ben Sira. §127 ....................................................... 87 I. The Cairo Geniza Fragments. §128 .................................... 88 a. Grammar. §129 ............................................................... 88 b. Vocabulary ........................................................................ 88 1. LBH Material ............................................................ 88 a. Verbs. §130 ......................................................... 88 ß. Nouns, §131 ......................................................... 88 2. M H Material. §132 ................................................... 89 a. Verbs. § 133 .......................................................... 89 ß.Nouns. §134 ......................................................... 89 3. Aramaic Material ...................................................... 89 a. Verbs. § 135 ......................................................... 89 ß. Nouns. §136 .......................................................... 89 y. An Aramaic Calque. §137 .............................. 89 4. A Word from an Unknown Source. § 138 ............... 90 II. The Masada Fragments. § 139 ................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Heichal Avodath Hashemb
    Heichal Avodath Hashem A Guide to Proper Pronunciation of Hebrew Rabbi Avi Grossman First Edition Introduction .................................................................................5 Exact Pronunciation – How? .......................................................7 The Superiority of the Yemenite Dialect .....................................9 The Letters that have been Confused and their Correct Pronunciations ............................................................................14 The Guttural Letters ...........................................................................................14 .14 Ayin‘ 'ע' The .15 Het 'ח' The 17 Hei 'ה' The .18 Alef 'א' The Non-Gutturals .....................................................................................................18 .18 Waw 'ו' The .20 Tet 'ט' The 20 Tzadi 'צ' The Kaf, Quf, and Gimmel ........................................................................................21 21 Quf 'ק' The The Weak Forms of the Beged Kefet Letters .............................22 Vet .......................................................................................................................22 The Weak Sound of Gimmel.............................................................................. 22 The Weak Dalet ..................................................................................................23 The Weak Tau ....................................................................................................25 The Vowels that have Become Confused and Their
    [Show full text]
  • China's Place in Philology: an Attempt to Show That the Languages of Europe and Asia Have a Common Origin
    CHARLES WILLIAM WASON COLLECTION CHINA AND THE CHINESE THE GIFT Of CHARLES WILLIAM WASON CLASS OF IB76 1918 Cornell University Library P 201.E23 China's place in phiiologyian attempt toI iPii 3 1924 023 345 758 CHmi'S PLACE m PHILOLOGY. Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924023345758 PLACE IN PHILOLOGY; AN ATTEMPT' TO SHOW THAT THE LANGUAGES OP EUROPE AND ASIA HAVE A COMMON OKIGIIS". BY JOSEPH EDKINS, B.A., of the London Missionary Society, Peking; Honorary Member of the Asiatic Societies of London and Shanghai, and of the Ethnological Society of France, LONDON: TRtJBNEE & CO., 8 aito 60, PATEENOSTER ROV. 1871. All rights reserved. ft WftSffVv PlOl "aitd the whole eaeth was op one langtta&e, and of ONE SPEECH."—Genesis xi. 1. "god hath made of one blood axl nations of men foe to dwell on all the face of the eaeth, and hath detee- MINED the ITMTIS BEFOEE APPOINTED, AND THE BOUNDS OP THEIS HABITATION." ^Acts Xvil. 26. *AW* & ju€V AiQionas fiereKlaOe tij\(J6* i6j/ras, AiOioiras, rol Si^^a SeSafarat effxarot av8p&Vf Ol fiiv ivffofievov Tireplovos, oi S' avdv-rof. Horn. Od. A. 22. TO THE DIRECTORS OF THE LONDON MISSIONAEY SOCIETY, IN EECOGNITION OP THE AID THEY HAVE RENDERED TO EELIGION AND USEFUL LEAENINO, BY THE RESEARCHES OP THEIR MISSIONARIES INTO THE LANGUAOES, PHILOSOPHY, CUSTOMS, AND RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, OP VARIOUS HEATHEN NATIONS, ESPECIALLY IN AFRICA, POLYNESIA, INDIA, AND CHINA, t THIS WORK IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED.
    [Show full text]
  • Emerged from Antiquity As an All-Jewish Possession, Together with Is Interesting
    7+ Yiddish in the Framework of OtherJewish Languages Yiddish in the Framework of OtherJewish Languages there discoverable threads extending lrom these three linguistic groups "Arabic" as a native tongue amongJews (in z.rr.I it will become to the ancient Parsic? These questions have not yet been touched by cle ar why it is more appropriate to spe ak of a separate Jewish language scholarship. with Arabic stock, which.may be called Yahudic) is current among a 2.ro The sunset of Targumic as the spoken language of a major much larger group. On the eve of World War II the number of Yahudic Jewish community came with the rise of the Arabs (z.r.r). A survey of speakers was estimated at about seven hundred thousand. Of course, we the linguistic condition of the Jews up to the Arab period is therefore in have no statistics on the Gaonic period, but by no means can the current place. figure give us any idea of the proportion and the dynamics of Yahudic The frontal attack of Hellenism on Jewish culture failed; but at least in former years. By virtue of the Arab conquests, Yahudic was firmly it was historical drama on a large scaie, and visible signs olJaphet's established in Yemen, Babylonia, Palestine, and all of North Africa, beauty remained in the tents of Shem, to use a stock phrase so popular from Egypt to the Atlantic; even Sicily and southern Italy, which as a in the Haskalah period. Nor will we leave Persian out of consideration rule should be included in the Yavanic culture area (z.I 2 ), were at times in the overall picture ofJewish subcultures, although the phenomenon considerably influenced by North Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical and Modern Standard Arabic Marijn Van Putten University of Leiden
    Chapter 3 Classical and Modern Standard Arabic Marijn van Putten University of Leiden The highly archaic Classical Arabic language and its modern iteration Modern Standard Arabic must to a large extent be seen as highly artificial archaizing reg- isters that are the High variety of a diglossic situation. The contact phenomena found in Classical Arabic and Modern Standard Arabic are therefore often the re- sult of imposition. Cases of borrowing are significantly rarer, and mainly found in the lexical sphere of the language. 1 Current state and historical development Classical Arabic (CA) is the highly archaic variety of Arabic that, after its cod- ification by the Arab Grammarians around the beginning of the ninth century, becomes the most dominant written register of Arabic. While forms of Middle Arabic, a style somewhat intermediate between CA and spoken dialects, gain some traction in the Middle Ages, CA remains the most important written regis- ter for official, religious and scientific purposes. From the moment of CA’s rise to dominance as a written language, the whole of the Arabic-speaking world can be thought of as having transitioned into a state of diglossia (Ferguson 1959; 1996), where CA takes up the High register and the spoken dialects the Low register.1 Representation in writing of these spoken dia- lects is (almost) completely absent in the written record for much of the Middle Ages. Eventually, CA came to be largely replaced for administrative purposes by Ottoman Turkish, and at the beginning of the nineteenth century, it was function- ally limited to religious domains (Glaß 2011: 836).
    [Show full text]
  • Contents Origins Transliteration
    Ayin , ע Ayin (also ayn or ain; transliterated ⟨ʿ⟩) is the sixteenth letter of the Semitic abjads, including Phoenician ʿayin , Hebrew ʿayin ← Samekh Ayin Pe → [where it is sixteenth in abjadi order only).[1) ع Aramaic ʿē , Syriac ʿē , and Arabic ʿayn Phoenician Hebrew Aramaic Syriac Arabic The letter represents or is used to represent a voiced pharyngeal fricative (/ʕ/) or a similarly articulated consonant. In some Semitic ع ע languages and dialects, the phonetic value of the letter has changed, or the phoneme has been lost altogether (thus, in Modern Hebrew it is reduced to a glottal stop or is omitted entirely). Phonemic ʕ The Phoenician letter is the origin of the Greek, Latin and Cyrillic letterO . representation Position in 16 alphabet Contents Numerical 70 value Origins (no numeric value in Transliteration Maltese) Unicode Alphabetic derivatives of the Arabic ʿayn Pronunciation Phoenician Hebrew Ayin Greek Latin Cyrillic Phonetic representation Ο O О Significance Character encodings References External links Origins The letter name is derived from Proto-Semitic *ʿayn- "eye", and the Phoenician letter had the shape of a circle or oval, clearly representing an eye, perhaps ultimately (via Proto-Sinaitic) derived from the ır͗ hieroglyph (Gardiner D4).[2] The Phoenician letter gave rise to theGreek Ο, Latin O, and Cyrillic О, all representing vowels. The sound represented by ayin is common to much of theAfroasiatic language family, such as in the Egyptian language, the Cushitic languages and the Semitic languages. Transliteration Depending on typography, this could look similar .( ﻋَ َﺮب In Semitic philology, there is a long-standing tradition of rendering Semitic ayin with Greek rough breathing the mark ̔〉 (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Semitic Roots: Machine Learning with Linguistic Constraints
    Identifying Semitic Roots: Machine Learning with Linguistic Constraints Ezra Daya∗ University of Haifa Dan Roth∗∗ University of Illinois Shuly Wintner† University of Haifa Words in Semitic languages are formed by combining two morphemes: a root and a pattern. The root consists of consonants only, by default three, and the pattern is a combination of vowels and consonants, with non-consecutive “slots” into which the root consonants are inserted. Identifying the root of a given word is an important task, considered to be an essential part of the morphological analysis of Semitic languages, and information on roots is important for linguistics research as well as for practical applications. We present a machine learning approach, augmented by limited linguistic knowledge, to the problem of identifying the roots of Semitic words. Although programs exist which can extract the root of words in Arabic and Hebrew, they are all dependent on labor-intensive construction of large-scale lexicons which are components of full-scale morphological analyzers. The advantage of our method is an automation of this process, avoiding the bottleneckof having to laboriously list the root and pattern of each lexeme in the language. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first application of machine learning to this problem, and one of the few attempts to directly address non-concatenative morphology using machine learning. More generally, our results shed light on the problem of combining classifiers under (linguistically motivated) constraints. 1. Introduction The standard account of word-formation processes in Semitic languages describes words as combinations of two morphemes: a root and a pattern.1 The root consists of consonants only, by default three (although longer roots are known), called radicals.
    [Show full text]
  • Spoken Hebrew of the Late Second Temple Period According to Oral and Written Samaritan Tradition*
    SPOKEN HEBREW OF THE LATE SECOND TEMPLE PERIOD ACCORDING TO ORAL AND WRITTEN SAMARITAN TRADITION* STEFAN SCHORCH Bielefeld Three different varieties of the Hebrew language are in use among present days Samaritans: Modern Israeli Hebrew, Samaritan Neo- Hebrew,1 and Samaritan Hebrew. While Samaritan Neo-Hebrew is the language used mainly for liturgical compositions after the revival of Hebrew in the 12th century CE, Samaritan Hebrew (= SH) is the Hebrew language employed in the reading of the Torah as transmitted in the Samaritan community. The present contribution will focus on the latter only. The linguistic evaluation of SH has undergone dramatic changes over the last 50 years, especially due to the work of Zeev Ben-Hayyim.2 While Rudolf Macuch in his comprehensive “Grammatik des samaritanischen Hebräisch” (1969) tried to explain most of the peculiarities of SH as the result of inuence from the Arabic vernacular adopted by the Samaritans around the 11th century CE,3 Ben-Hayyim successfully demonstrated ———— * Thanks are due to Mr. James Harland (Bethel/Oxford) for his thoughtful comments and for correcting my English. 1 For a detailed account of the latter, see Moshe Florentin, Late Samaritan Hebrew: a linguistic analysis of its different types, Studies in Semitic languages and linguistics 43 (Leiden/Boston, 2005). 2 See especially Zeev Ben-Hayyim, The Literary and Oral Tradition of Hebrew and Aramaic Amongst the Samaritans (5 volumes) (Jerusalem, 1957–1977 [= LOT I-V]). Volume 5 contains a grammar of Samaritan Hebrew which was subsequently translated into English: Zeev Ben-Hayyim, A grammar of Samaritan Hebrew: based on the recitation of the law in comparison with the Tiberian and other Jewish traditions (revised edition in English with assistance from Abraham Tal) (Jerusalem, Winona Lake, 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • How Was the Dageš in Biblical Hebrew Pronounced and Why Is It There? Geoffrey Khan
    1 pronounced and why is it בָּתִּ ים How was the dageš in Biblical Hebrew there? Geoffrey Khan houses’ is generally presented as an enigma in‘ בָּתִּ ים The dageš in the Biblical Hebrew plural form descriptions of the language. A wide variety of opinions about it have been expressed in Biblical Hebrew textbooks, reference grammars and the scholarly literature, but many of these are speculative without any direct or comparative evidence. One of the aims of this article is to examine the evidence for the way the dageš was pronounced in this word in sources that give us direct access to the Tiberian Masoretic reading tradition. A second aim is to propose a reason why the word has a dageš on the basis of comparative evidence within Biblical Hebrew reading traditions and other Semitic languages. בָּתִּיםבָּתִּ ים The Pronunciation of the Dageš in .1.0 The Tiberian vocalization signs and accents were created by the Masoretes of Tiberias in the early Islamic period to record an oral tradition of reading. There is evidence that this reading tradition had its roots in the Second Temple period, although some features of it appear to have developed at later periods. 1 The Tiberian reading was regarded in the Middle Ages as the most prestigious and authoritative tradition. On account of the authoritative status of the reading, great efforts were made by the Tiberian Masoretes to fix the tradition in a standardized form. There remained, nevertheless, some degree of variation in reading and sign notation in the Tiberian Masoretic school. By the end of the Masoretic period in the 10 th century C.E.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sign of the Cross
    The Sign of the Cross ἰχθύς – fish – acrostic: Ίησοῦς Χριστός, Θεοῦ Υἱός, Σωτήρ (Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior) From early EPhesus: From the catacomb os St. Sebastian (martyed c 288): Hebrew tav: Cursive (scriPt) Hebrew: For Jews, who may not say or write God’s name, the letter taw was used as a rePresentation of God’s name. It’s the last letter in the Hebrew alPhabet and synbolizes the end, comPletion, and Perfection. Note the similarity to the Greek letter chi (first letter in the Greek Christ (Χριστός) Some early icons (note the mark of the cross on the forehead): 1 A “mark” is sometimes a negative thing in the Old Testament. Cain is “marked” (see Genesis 4:15) “So the LORD Put a mark on Cain, so that no one would kill him at sight.” A sore on the forehead could mark a Person as unclean. See Leviticus ChaPter 14. Note our discussion on Ezekiel. In the New Testament: Revelation 14:1: Then I looked and there was the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him a hundred and forty-four thousand who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads. Revelation 22:4 - They will look upon his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. St. Cyril of Jerusalem (fourth century) “Let us then not be ashamed to confess to Crucified. Let the cross as a seal, be boldly made with our fingers uPon our brow and on all occasions; over the bread we eat, over the cuPs and drink, in our comings and goings, before sleeP, on lying down and rising uP, when we are on our way and when we are still.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Read Lesson Flashcards English.Dwd
    g h g g Ug Ig `a `i `e `u `o `ayin + qamatz `ayin + hiriq maleh `ayin + tzereh `ayin + shuruq `ayin + holam Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 P h P P UP IP pa pi pe pu po peh + qamatz peh + hiriq maleh peh + tzereh peh + shuruq peh + holam Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 b hb b Ub Ib na ni ne nu no nun + qamatz nun + hiriq maleh nun + tzereh nun + shuruq nun + holam Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 Hebrew From Day One Lesson 4 p h p p Up Ip pha phi phe phu pho pheh + qamatz pheh + hiriq maleh pheh + tzereh pheh + shuruq pheh + holam Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards © Rabbi Jana De Benedetti Flashcards
    [Show full text]
  • The Biradical Origin of Semitic Roots
    Copyright by Bernice Varjick Hecker 2007 The Dissertation Committee for Bernice Varjick Hecker certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: The Biradical Origin of Semitic Roots Committee: Robert D. King, Supervisor Robert T. Harms Richard P. Meier Esther L. Raizen Peter F. Abboud THE BIRADICAL ORIGIN OF SEMITIC ROOTS by Bernice Varjick Hecker, M.A., M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May, 2007 Dedication To Mark Southern, who awakened and sustained my interest in the Ancient Near East. Acknowledgments I would first like to thank Prof. Harms, who supervised my earlier paper, for teaching me that there is no way to conclusively prove a theory about an early stage of a prehistoric language but that it was possible to demonstrate its likelihood. His comments at an early stage of this work were invaluable in showing me how to go about doing so. I would also like to thank Prof. King, my dissertation supervisor, who was an unfailing font of support and who gave me excellent advice and direction. My husband, Ran Moran, was the sine qua non of this project. There is no way that I could have completed it without his help, both in accommodating to my schedule and in expending all the resources that I brought to bear on writing this dissertation. v The Biradical Origin of Semitic Roots Publication No._____________ Bernice Varjick Hecker, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Prevalence and Risk Factors of Anxiety and Depression Among The
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Prevalence and risk factors of anxiety and depression among the community‑dwelling elderly in Nay Pyi Taw Union Territory, Myanmar Su Myat Cho1, Yu Mon Saw1,2*, Thu Nandar Saw3, Thet Mon Than4, Moe Khaing4, Aye Thazin Khine5, Tetsuyoshi Kariya1,2, Pa Pa Soe6, San Oo7 & Nobuyuki Hamajima1 Providing elderly mental healthcare in Myanmar is challenging due to the growing elderly population and limited health resources. To understand common mental health problems among Myanmar elderly, this study explored the prevalence and risk factors of anxiety and depression among the elderly in the Nay Pyi Taw Union Territory, Myanmar. A cross‑sectional study was conducted among 655 elderly by face‑to‑face interviews with a pretested questionnaire. Descriptive analysis and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed. The prevalence of anxiety and depression were 39.4% (33.5% for males and 42.4% for females) and 35.6% (33.0% for males and 36.9% for females), respectively. The adjusted odds ratio of having anxiety was signifcant for having low education level, having comorbidity, having BMI < 21.3, poor dental health, no social participation, and having no one to consult regarding personal problems, while that of having depression was signifcant for having comorbidity, having BMI < 21.3, poor vision, and having no one to consult regarding personal problems. The reported prevalence of anxiety and depression indicate the demand for mental healthcare services among Myanmar elderly. Myanmar needs to improve its elderly care, mental healthcare, and social security system to refect the actual needs of its increasing elderly population.
    [Show full text]