RSS

The Name of Father from linguist perspektif

15 Des

Why YA-hu-WAH?

11 Desember 2014 pukul 12:34

by Lashon Habrit

Why YA-hu-WAH and Yahweh, Yahwah, YeHoWeH, YeHoVAH,   etc. etc.

My strongest argument is by way of semantic approach.  What does YHWH mean?  I will begin with the authority of the Messiah when He says, “I Am (the Aleph and the Tau)-he who – Lives, and was Dead, and Behold, I am alive forever more.   To say this in Hebrew “I Am – he who – lives” How would you say this in Hebrew?  Like this.  HaYah-hu’-HaWah.  Now, Hebrew is an agglutinating language.  That means that Hebrew is one of those languages that “glues” words and expressions together.  In the agglutination process, words are reduced, or collapsed by rules we call bleeding rules whereby words are collapsed when brought together through anticipatory or peseverative sounds in their environments.  Anticipatory means giving way to anticipated sounds coming up afterward, and perseverative sounds are sounds made before that take over.  So there is overlapping and collapse.

So, in HaYah Hu’ HaWah, the Ha is dropped in HaYah and HaWah. That’s the first linguistic “bleeding” rule in fusing these 3 words. The “h” in Yah is dropped so as not to combine with the “h” in “hu'”, which is an anticipatory linguistic bleeding rule. Otherwise the double “h” would morph into a “hheth”, which is not seen in the tetragrammaton. Finally, the glottal stop aleph, which I represent by (‘) is dropped in anticipation of the W in Wah. Thus we have YA-hu-WAH and the meaning of the words are retained in their reduced forms. YA has enough of HaYah to pick up the meaning “I Am”. “hu” has enough of hu’ to pick up the meaning “he who”. Wah has enough of HaWah to pick up on the meaning “lives”. So this is my argument by semantics and agglutination.

My second argument is by process of elimination. Yahweh cannot be His name for several good reasons: (1) It breaks rule which Gesenius himself advanced, while ironically he accepted and used the name Yahweh. You cannot use “hey” as a vowel marker in the middle of a word. It must be pronounced and followed by a vowel. Gesenius, as we all do, had his share of blind sides. This was one of his; (2) Yahweh is in fact a word borrowed into English from Latin, not Hebrew. We spell it Jove, but is pronounced in Latin as Yahweh; (3) Jove is a variation of Jupiter. So on the basis of the first commandment, Yahweh is unacceptable.

Then there is the prosodic argument we have all heard by rhyme scheme. When YA-hu-DHAH was born, his mother Leiah said that she would call his name YA-hu-DHAH for she would yet Praise YA-hu-WAH. YA-hu-DHAH is meant to rhyme with YA-hu-WAH. In fact, it has been said, and it makes sense, that the DA-leth is what makes the meaning praise, since YA-hu-DHAH means “Praiser of YA-hu-WAH”.

Back to process of elimination: YahWah is also not acceptable for the first reason that YahWeh is not. It does not conform to that Hebrew grammar/pronciation rule about “hey” not being silent in the middle of a word.

IaHuWeH is not acceptable transliteration because even though our English letter “I” comes from Latin “I”, which comes from Greek Iota, which comes for Hebrew Yodh, the original Yodh was a consonant, and it has morphed into a vowel on its way into English. The English letter that now represents the sound of Yodh is “y” in its consonant form.

Also the suffix -weh has no meaning.

The notion that the name of the Creator is the sound of breathing in and breathing out is found no where in Scripture.

All of the letters of the tetragrammaton are consonants.

Although Yahuah is permissible, it is built on the false premise that there was no “w” in ancient Hebrew, which any historical linguist worth their salt will immediately reject out of hand. There was no “v” in original Hebrew, which eliminates Ye-HO-vah or YE-ho-VAH.

The Yeho- prefix in many names in Scripture is a shift from the original Yahu- prefix, which is still retained in names as a suffix, like MAT-tiyth-YAhu, ‘EL-i-YAhu, or YA-sha-YAhu.

The best rebuttal I know of for those who say YA-hu-WAH is a feminine noun and therefore cannot be the name of the Father is that the word “fathers” in Hebrew (abh) has a feminine form in the plural. That does not mean the word “abh-OTH” cannot mean “fathers”; it just means there is a lacking of the knowledge of parametric variations between English and Hebrew on the part of the person making such assumptions. And then there are people like Nehemyah Gordan that might be offended by the notion that he cannot be called Nehemyah because Nehemyah has a feminine ending.

 
Tinggalkan komentar

Ditulis oleh pada Desember 15, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tinggalkan Balasan

Isikan data di bawah atau klik salah satu ikon untuk log in:

Logo WordPress.com

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Logout / Ubah )

Gambar Twitter

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Facebook

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Google+

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Logout / Ubah )

Connecting to %s

 
%d blogger menyukai ini: