Page 1 of 2

Isaiah

Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2005 4:08 pm
by anders
Having looked at Flam’s signature, I became interested. Isaiah is Jesaja in Swedish and German. In those three languages, the name of the book is the same as that of the prophet himself (as given in Isa. 1:1).

My bilingual Latin-Hebrew Bible (1740) has in its Latin version the book as LIBER JESAIAE and in 1:1 Visio Jeschajæ. Strange difference.

I also looked in a TaNaK from 1828, and in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (1984). All three Hebrew books (i.e. including the above-mentioned 1740) were, undotted, named ישעיה and in all of them, 1:1 had ישׁעיהו. Why is there no waw in the book name (or, why is it added to the prophet name)?

My first efforts to post capsized, probably because of busy servers, but I got so far as to note that not all letters from my Windows standard Unicode fonts could be copied (I tried Times and Arial Cyrillic (!) schwa for a transcription, and twice “long s” for the 1:1 quote in Latin). Also, the superscript code [sup] didn’t work. Is there a way to use super- and subscripts? Which font works best for copying non-English letters into posts?

Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:09 pm
by Garzo
The extra ו (waw) is part of the divine name or Tetragrammaton. At the end of a name it is often either ־יה (-yah), or ־יהו (-yahu). There are a few names where this is the case: Eliyahu haNavi is Elijah the Prophet.

Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:29 pm
by anders
OK, so there are two forms of the one name. I guessed so much. But why the consistent use of one for the chapter and the other one for the person?

Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:38 pm
by Garzo
That's to do with a little game called Ketiv-weQere: a rabbinic version of tetris. What is writ, haKetiv, is writ, and there isn't much a mortal should do about it. However, when called upon to recite what's writ, one makes a few alterations: haQere. The most famous example is with the Divine Name, the Tetragrammaton, which is NOT read as writ, but pronounced as 'Adonai' (my Lord) in scriptural reading and in prayer, and 'haShem' (the Name) elsewhere. Perhaps some of this happened with personal names. At some stage, the final ו (waw) was not pronounced: perhaps three letters were felt to be too sacred. As the headings of books are not scripture, the K-Q rules do not apply. Whenever the rules do not apply, the spelling follows the sensible Qere.

Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2005 7:27 am
by anders
Many thanks. I never thought of the headings being outside the scripture. Perfectly logical.

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 1:53 pm
by astrokatastro
a hat

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:22 pm
by Brazilian dude
I don't mean this in a bad way, but I don't know squat about Greek, be it modern or classical. I was wondering if anybody else here did.

Brazilian dude

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 3:55 pm
by Apoclima
Hey, astrokatastro! I know that you want your Greek to be more accessible to us with the Roman alphabet, but it is easier for me to look up if you keep in in the original Greek letters.

Just a thought! I don't think that most understand it in a Roman script anyway!

I think this is the quote from Isaiah about the birth of the Savior!

"Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14[b]

Apo

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:13 pm
by Apoclima
δια τουτο δωσει κυριος αυτος υμιν σημειον ιδου η παρθενος
εν γαστρι εξει και τεξεται υιον και καλεσεις το ονομα
αυτου Εμμανουηλ

Απο

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:15 pm
by anders
Of course Isaiah (if he existed) couldn't have had a notion of Yeshua Josephson, and so all modern translations use "a young girl" instead of "a virgin".

And Y.J. wasn't named anything close to Emmanuel.

You could try searching http://www.iidb.org for "Isaiah virgin" or "almah".

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:19 pm
by Brazilian dude
I know that you want your Greek to be more accessible to us with the Roman alphabet, but it is easier for me to look up if you keep in in the original Greek letters.

Roman or not Roman, it's still Greek to me. Apo, would you understand Chinese better if it were written in pin-ying (or whichever way you spell that)? :wink:

Brazilian dude

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:35 pm
by Apoclima
Exactly my point, BD! The Roman script just makes it harder for me to look up, and does nothing to make it accessible to English speakers!

Apo

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:38 pm
by Brazilian dude
Why only English speakers? What about everybody else who's clueless about Greek?

Brazilian dude

Just in a teasing mood.

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 5:52 pm
by tcward
Apo uses finely honed googling skills. He can search on a phrase he can't even read, but only if it is using the same alphabet that the rest of the world uses when they write it.

So transliterating the Greek alphabet into Roman letters makes it impossible for those of us with such research skills to perform our obsessive-compulsive behavior to find out what the heck the person is talking about!

Please use the Greek alphabet when quoting Greek, ok? :)

-Tim

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 5:59 pm
by Apoclima
Tim:
So transliterating the Greek alphabet into Roman letters makes it impossible for those of us with such research skills to perform our obsessive-compulsive behavior to find out what the heck the person is talking about!


Yup.

BD:
Why only English speakers? What about everybody else who's clueless about Greek?


It would be better to say that Greek written in Roman characters does not make it more accessible to people who understand languages that use a Roman script or any other script, for that matter, including Greek itself, mind you!

Is that better, BD?

Apo