| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| diacritics [2024/03/20 01:44] – ken | diacritics [2024/12/27 14:43] (current) – ken |
|---|
| One thing is clear though; out of the nine diacritics examined in this example, seven of the nine had no impact whatsoever on the pronunciation (nor the meaning) leaving only two that //might// influence pronunciation. This is a far cry from the claim that in general "diacritics determine pronunciation". That statement, is at best only 2/9ths true. In other words it scores only 22% on the test. In our books, that is a FAIL. | One thing is clear though; out of the nine diacritics examined in this example, seven of the nine had no impact whatsoever on the pronunciation (nor the meaning) leaving only two that //might// influence pronunciation. This is a far cry from the claim that in general "diacritics determine pronunciation". That statement, is at best only 2/9ths true. In other words it scores only 22% on the test. In our books, that is a FAIL. |
| |
| One final note on the subject of diacritics, it has been claimed by some theologians that Jesus referenced these diacritics in Mathew 5:18. Jesus states that "//Not one jot or tittle shall pass away from the law//." They claim states that the "jot and tittle" spoken of by Jesus refers to the diacritics found in the Hebrew scriptures which Jesus calls "the law" in reference to "the Law of Moses". The problem with this claim is this. At the time of Jesus, the Hebrew scriptures did not contain diacritics. They would not be added until at least five hundred years later. Unfortunately, Jesus did not give us the answer as to whether we should attempt to make any sense of the diacritics, since he himself never lived to see their introduction. | FIXME do another example using [[pereket]] |
| |
| ====Diacritic Tonality==== | ====Diacritic Tonality==== |
| |
| Diacritics in no way affect the meanings of the words and only moderately affect the basic pronunciation in spoken language. | Diacritics in no way affect the meanings of the words and only moderately affect the basic pronunciation in spoken language. |
| |
| ====Who Cares?==== | |
| This is only worth bringing up because in today's Christian understanding of the Hebrew Bible, many of the word meanings come from erroneous distinctions made long ago, and substantiated via Strong's Concordance and other exegetical tools. These erroneous distinctions are in large part due to, or at least supposedly backed by, the concept that diacritics change the vowels contain within a word, forming a "different" word and thus allowing spurious semantics to be thrust upon the word. However, in many cases the case for a different word is very weak. In many cases, the root words are ignored, and new root words are proposed out of thin air in order to justify a meaning that better fits the translators presumptions. To some degree, this is likely to be inevitable. All translators have preconceived notions which influence their work. The same is true in the case of our own translation work. This is why we are going out of our way to present transparency in our translation processes, and hence why we feel it is important to discuss openly even technical details which may seem trivial or boring. | |
| |
| ====Our Process==== | ====Our Process==== |
| This work has has since been further developed into a [[transliterative alphabet]] | This work has has since been further developed into a [[transliterative alphabet]] |
| |
| | |
| | ====Who Cares?==== |
| | In modern Christian understanding of the Hebrew Bible, many of the word meanings come from erroneous distinctions made long ago, and substantiated via Strong's [[Concordance]] and other exegetical tools. These erroneous distinctions are in large part due to, or at least supposedly backed by, the concept that diacritics change the vowels contain within a word, forming a "different" word and thus allowing spurious semantics to be thrust upon the word. However, in many cases the case for a different word is very weak. In many cases, the root words are ignored, and new root words are proposed out of thin air in order to justify a meaning that better fits the translators presumptions. To some degree, this is likely to be inevitable. All translators have preconceived notions which influence their work. The same is true in the case of our own translation work. This is why we are going out of our way to present transparency in our translation processes, and hence why we feel it is important to discuss openly even technical details which may seem trivial or boring. |
| | |
| | ====Jesus teaching on Diacritics==== |
| | One final note on the subject of diacritics, it has been claimed by some theologians that diacritics are the subject of a remark made by Jesus which appears in Mathew 5:18. Jesus states that "//Not one jot or tittle shall pass away from the law//." They claim states that the "jot and tittle" spoken of by Jesus refers to the diacritics found in the Hebrew scriptures which Jesus calls "the law" in reference to "the Law of Moses". The problem with this claim is this. At the time of Jesus, the Hebrew scriptures did not contain diacritics. They would not be added until at least five hundred years later. Unfortunately, Jesus did not give us the answer as to whether we should attempt to make any sense of the diacritics, since he himself never lived to see their introduction. |
| |
