![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
please,samaritan hebrew is even more reduced than ashkenazi hebrew,lacking even more gutterals also you seem to thing that samaritan script and ancient hebrew(paleo Hebrew) are the same, your wrong Samaritan has changed just as much since even the Aramaic alphabet used from hebrew evolved from paleohebrew which also used to write aramaic,samaritan script is different. http://www.omniglot.com/images/writing/aramaic.gif vs http://www.omniglot.com/images/writing/samaritan.gif —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.241.66 ( talk) 05:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Samaritan language is original ancient Hebrew! You give another impression in this article. Strange! Should nobody know that actual Hebrew Bible is not a original version?! Should we let the people of the world believe that this rabbinic version (arranged with babilonian's letters by Esra) is the right version? No. You are obliged to make clearely that the actual Hebrew version of Torah (+Tenach) is a traduction version (from Aramenian). Nobody has right to teach the lies! unsigned comment by anon user 84.226.114.95
number one calm down, the main the changed was the script not the language. It not original Hebrew, for Waw evoled into Baa, 'Adeni Yememenite Hebrew is much closer in the area of pronunication. It preserves interesting elements for example the names of letters a slighty different.
Surely the grammar section should be renamed "parts of speech"? It in no way addresses the grammatical rules of the language. Ataru 01:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Agreed.
I don't think it's accurate to call Samaritan Hebrew a Jewish language. In fact, since there is SAMARITAN Hebrew, I don't think it's accurate to call Hebrew as a whole a Jewish language. I think it would probably be more accurate to say that most DIALECTS of Hebrew are Jewish. Gringo300 05:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Since there is Samaritan Hebrew, it appears to me that it would be accurate to say that there is such thing as Jewish Hebrew. Any opinions and/or comments from anyone else? Gringo300 14:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes. J was invented after 1,000AD. The language is Hebrew. You must mean Yiddish? That would be more recent. 4WhatMakesSense ( talk) 18:31, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Jews can mean Judean.-- 72.38.211.144 ( talk) 03:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
We must compare the Judean Hebrew with the Samaritan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.211.144 ( talk) 19:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- ’Ā´lāph. ' / ʔ/
- Bîhth. / b/
- Gā´mān. / ɡ/
- Dā´lath. / d/
- Iē’. /ey/,
- Báā. / b/
- Zēn. / z/
- Īhth.
- Tihth. / tˁ/
- Yūhth. / y/
- Káph. / k/
- Lā´bāth. / l/
- Mīīm. / m/
- Nūn. / n/
- Sîn´gath/Sîn´kath. / s/
- ‛A´yîn. / ʕ/
- Phī’. / f/
- Tsa•dhey´. /tzsˁ/ /tş/
- Qūhph. /qˁ/
- Rīhšh. / ɾ/
- šhān. / š/ (sh)
- Táph./ t/
-- 72.38.211.144 ( talk) 23:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
It seems that the vowels o, u are a bit stronger, longer, and more round. Also, the Samaritan speech seems to come from the depth of ones throat.
They would say Quoting one reference source the escaping Ephraimites, during their conflict with Jephthah, gave themselves away to the Gileadite sentries at the fords of the Jordan by mispronouncing the initial “sh” sound of this password...saying “Sibboleth.” (Judges 12:4-6) Thus, it is evident that some variation of pronunciation existed among the tribes, even as in later times the Galileans had a manner of speech distinct from the Judeans.—Compare Matthew 26:73; Luke 22:59.” —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.144.241 ( talk) 03:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The most comprehensive material concerning Samaritan Hebrew is Ze'ev Ben-Hayyim's five-volume "Literary and Oral Tradition of Hebrew and Aramaic According to the Samaritans (LOTS). The fifth volume is a grammar that has been translated into English. The volumes are in Modern Hebrew. Rudolf Macuch has published a German grammar of Samaritan Hebrew. There is not much else out there. It is quite different than the Jewish Massoretic Tradition, as is obvious when listening to the Shma. --
24.57.60.200 (
talk)
04:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
This is Shma Yisrael, the samaritan says "u-kashartem l-ut al-yedek, w-ayu l-tatafot bin eenek, u-katabtem al-mazoozot betek ub-sharek".
Samaritan: u-qashartem l-ut al-yedek, b-ayu l-tataphoht bin eenek, u-katabtem al-mazoozot betek ub-sharek
Judean: u-qashartim lauth ohl-yedek, w-ayu l-tataphoht bin eenek, u-katabtem al-mezuzoth′ bithek ub-shorik.
In the article, "ellêm" is translated as "the meat". However, it looks to me like it's the rendering of הלחם, which would be "the bread", no? If not, what's the Hebrew word that's being rendered phonetically here? BeIsKr ( talk) 21:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Didn't site a source, not related to posted content. And the Aramaic or Biblical Hebrew spelling for god's name as Jesus spoke it, is pronounce "el-aw" (later Arabic Allah). You "BeIsKr" post is a clever insult; hinting at the last supper.
Spelling of "Tanakh"(Hebrew bible) is an insult to the "Hapi-anakh". The Cow God early Hebrews worshiped, more than a few times. Suggesting meat in this context is the butchering of God = Butchered Calf of Egypt's Hapi-Anakh(Black Water Buffalo), Jesus the Calf of Mary, and Allah the name of God. (BTW, the angel who led Moses/Moshe people after the Bronze & Gold graven Calf debacle, was the Female Cow the tribe had with them.)
4WhatMakesSense ( talk) 18:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
https://archive.org/details/samaritanischest00kohn
Rajmaan ( talk) 07:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
https://archive.org/details/institutioneslin00uhleuoft
Rajmaan ( talk) 07:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
The article uses a mixture of IPA symbols, fairly standard Semitistic symbols, and others that seem to be made up ad hoc. Please define your symbols! Any symbol that is used differently from the way it's defined in the IPA should be defined. Even better, the symbols throughout the article should be used in a uniform way.-- Linguistatlunch ( talk) 18:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
The previous edition of this article said: "Between 1815 and 1835, Wilhelm Gesenius wrote his treatises on the original of the Samaritan version, proving that it postdated the Masoretic text." But the article on the Samaritan Pentateuch contains a longer discussion under /info/en/?search=Samaritan_Pentateuch#Evaluations_of_its_relevance_for_textual_criticism that shows there is no unity among scholars about this. Rather different views seem to dominate now. The reference for the original text above does not take this into account. I want to change the original "proving" to "claiming" and add a link to the Samaritan Pentateuch Evaluation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.153.19.114 ( talk) 21:59, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
please,samaritan hebrew is even more reduced than ashkenazi hebrew,lacking even more gutterals also you seem to thing that samaritan script and ancient hebrew(paleo Hebrew) are the same, your wrong Samaritan has changed just as much since even the Aramaic alphabet used from hebrew evolved from paleohebrew which also used to write aramaic,samaritan script is different. http://www.omniglot.com/images/writing/aramaic.gif vs http://www.omniglot.com/images/writing/samaritan.gif —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.241.66 ( talk) 05:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Samaritan language is original ancient Hebrew! You give another impression in this article. Strange! Should nobody know that actual Hebrew Bible is not a original version?! Should we let the people of the world believe that this rabbinic version (arranged with babilonian's letters by Esra) is the right version? No. You are obliged to make clearely that the actual Hebrew version of Torah (+Tenach) is a traduction version (from Aramenian). Nobody has right to teach the lies! unsigned comment by anon user 84.226.114.95
number one calm down, the main the changed was the script not the language. It not original Hebrew, for Waw evoled into Baa, 'Adeni Yememenite Hebrew is much closer in the area of pronunication. It preserves interesting elements for example the names of letters a slighty different.
Surely the grammar section should be renamed "parts of speech"? It in no way addresses the grammatical rules of the language. Ataru 01:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Agreed.
I don't think it's accurate to call Samaritan Hebrew a Jewish language. In fact, since there is SAMARITAN Hebrew, I don't think it's accurate to call Hebrew as a whole a Jewish language. I think it would probably be more accurate to say that most DIALECTS of Hebrew are Jewish. Gringo300 05:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Since there is Samaritan Hebrew, it appears to me that it would be accurate to say that there is such thing as Jewish Hebrew. Any opinions and/or comments from anyone else? Gringo300 14:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes. J was invented after 1,000AD. The language is Hebrew. You must mean Yiddish? That would be more recent. 4WhatMakesSense ( talk) 18:31, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Jews can mean Judean.-- 72.38.211.144 ( talk) 03:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
We must compare the Judean Hebrew with the Samaritan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.211.144 ( talk) 19:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- ’Ā´lāph. ' / ʔ/
- Bîhth. / b/
- Gā´mān. / ɡ/
- Dā´lath. / d/
- Iē’. /ey/,
- Báā. / b/
- Zēn. / z/
- Īhth.
- Tihth. / tˁ/
- Yūhth. / y/
- Káph. / k/
- Lā´bāth. / l/
- Mīīm. / m/
- Nūn. / n/
- Sîn´gath/Sîn´kath. / s/
- ‛A´yîn. / ʕ/
- Phī’. / f/
- Tsa•dhey´. /tzsˁ/ /tş/
- Qūhph. /qˁ/
- Rīhšh. / ɾ/
- šhān. / š/ (sh)
- Táph./ t/
-- 72.38.211.144 ( talk) 23:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
It seems that the vowels o, u are a bit stronger, longer, and more round. Also, the Samaritan speech seems to come from the depth of ones throat.
They would say Quoting one reference source the escaping Ephraimites, during their conflict with Jephthah, gave themselves away to the Gileadite sentries at the fords of the Jordan by mispronouncing the initial “sh” sound of this password...saying “Sibboleth.” (Judges 12:4-6) Thus, it is evident that some variation of pronunciation existed among the tribes, even as in later times the Galileans had a manner of speech distinct from the Judeans.—Compare Matthew 26:73; Luke 22:59.” —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.144.241 ( talk) 03:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The most comprehensive material concerning Samaritan Hebrew is Ze'ev Ben-Hayyim's five-volume "Literary and Oral Tradition of Hebrew and Aramaic According to the Samaritans (LOTS). The fifth volume is a grammar that has been translated into English. The volumes are in Modern Hebrew. Rudolf Macuch has published a German grammar of Samaritan Hebrew. There is not much else out there. It is quite different than the Jewish Massoretic Tradition, as is obvious when listening to the Shma. --
24.57.60.200 (
talk)
04:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
This is Shma Yisrael, the samaritan says "u-kashartem l-ut al-yedek, w-ayu l-tatafot bin eenek, u-katabtem al-mazoozot betek ub-sharek".
Samaritan: u-qashartem l-ut al-yedek, b-ayu l-tataphoht bin eenek, u-katabtem al-mazoozot betek ub-sharek
Judean: u-qashartim lauth ohl-yedek, w-ayu l-tataphoht bin eenek, u-katabtem al-mezuzoth′ bithek ub-shorik.
In the article, "ellêm" is translated as "the meat". However, it looks to me like it's the rendering of הלחם, which would be "the bread", no? If not, what's the Hebrew word that's being rendered phonetically here? BeIsKr ( talk) 21:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Didn't site a source, not related to posted content. And the Aramaic or Biblical Hebrew spelling for god's name as Jesus spoke it, is pronounce "el-aw" (later Arabic Allah). You "BeIsKr" post is a clever insult; hinting at the last supper.
Spelling of "Tanakh"(Hebrew bible) is an insult to the "Hapi-anakh". The Cow God early Hebrews worshiped, more than a few times. Suggesting meat in this context is the butchering of God = Butchered Calf of Egypt's Hapi-Anakh(Black Water Buffalo), Jesus the Calf of Mary, and Allah the name of God. (BTW, the angel who led Moses/Moshe people after the Bronze & Gold graven Calf debacle, was the Female Cow the tribe had with them.)
4WhatMakesSense ( talk) 18:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
https://archive.org/details/samaritanischest00kohn
Rajmaan ( talk) 07:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
https://archive.org/details/institutioneslin00uhleuoft
Rajmaan ( talk) 07:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
The article uses a mixture of IPA symbols, fairly standard Semitistic symbols, and others that seem to be made up ad hoc. Please define your symbols! Any symbol that is used differently from the way it's defined in the IPA should be defined. Even better, the symbols throughout the article should be used in a uniform way.-- Linguistatlunch ( talk) 18:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
The previous edition of this article said: "Between 1815 and 1835, Wilhelm Gesenius wrote his treatises on the original of the Samaritan version, proving that it postdated the Masoretic text." But the article on the Samaritan Pentateuch contains a longer discussion under /info/en/?search=Samaritan_Pentateuch#Evaluations_of_its_relevance_for_textual_criticism that shows there is no unity among scholars about this. Rather different views seem to dominate now. The reference for the original text above does not take this into account. I want to change the original "proving" to "claiming" and add a link to the Samaritan Pentateuch Evaluation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.153.19.114 ( talk) 21:59, 5 November 2021 (UTC)