> > Hebrew (Biblical or Modern) does certainly *have*
> > vowels. (I know, you weren't suggesting it
> > didn't.) They simply aren't represented by
> > characters in the alphabet as they are in English.
> > I would argue that the "reason" Hebrew didn't need
> > vowels, is that...well...neither does English, or
> > any other language. Obviously we need to *speak*
> > the vowels, but write each one out? Anyone
> > familiar with Hebrew can easily read aloud (with
> > correct vowels) a Hebrew text without vowle
> > markers. If i were to have written this post
> > without any vowles, my guess is that, with very
> > little difficulty, you would have understood it.
> >
> > Aftr ll, y cn undrstnd ths sntnc, rght?
> >
> > Anyway, this was just a little side note to my
> > original question. I simply wanted to make clear
> > that the reason written Hebrew does not represent
> > vowels, is that they're simply not necessary.
> > Hebrew is a very "compact" language in many ways,
> > the lack of alphabet vowles being only one
> > example.
> >
> > Gr"p.s. there *are* vowels markers in Hebrew, they
> > are just very rarely used, and consist of small
> > dots and dashes marked underneath the consonant to
> > which they belong"ace
>
> But you do notice some words, with out vowels, can be confussing.
> For instance, what word do I mean here.
> This is my ct.
>
> What is ct? Is it a cat or a cot? In something like the bible, which uses a lot of allusions, metaphores, and images confussion like this can change the meaning of an entire passage.

Right. While I don't speak or read Hebrew myself, my understanding is that Grace is correct that you can generally read it even without vowel markers. But my point remains that the vowel points in the Masoretic text are less ancient and less reliable than the consonants, and that those vowel points are one of the most important reasons that translators use that particular text as the primary source.

As for examples from hebrew itself...well, I see a couple straight off flipping through my copy of Robert Alter's translation of Genesis (which I'm also going to be referencing in response to another post in a minute.) For example, Genesis 49:6, according to Alter, should be translated "In their council let me never set foot, their assembly my presence shun. for in their fury they slaughtered men, at their pleasure they tore down ramparts." He notes that "With many critics, the translation here reads "shur", a poetic term for wall, instead of "shor," ox, as the Masoretic Text has it." He goes on to explain why he finds ramparts a better translation. But clearly, at some points which vowel to insert was not entirely obvious, even to the Masorites. Although I still think Grace was basically correct in her response.

Tom
tmschm@wm.edu