3. Biblical Hebrew as reflected in the orthography of biblical Dead Sea Scrolls (BH_Qum) - to the extent that relevant evidence is available.

4. Biblical Hebrew pointed with Palestinian Vocalization (BH_Pal)[3] - to the extent that relevant evidence is available.

5. Biblical Hebrew pointed with Babylonian Vocalization (BH_Bab)[4] - to the extent that relevant evidence is available.

6. Biblical Hebrew as pronounced by the modern Samaritans (BH_SAM)

7. The range of modern Jewish pronunciations.

However, in practice, given:

· most of the areas of dispute relate to the vowel system of BH;

· the superbly crafted and comprehensive nature of the Tiberian masoretic system which, in many cases preserves evidence of early pronunciations lost in the various non-Tiberian traditions;

· the fragmentary nature of the vocalization that can be deduced from the vowel letters of the biblical Dead Sea Scrolls;

· the difficulties of interpreting the Greek evidence[5];

· the pervasive influence of Aramaic on post-exilic Hebrew in general and the highly Aramaized nature evidenced by BH_Pal, BH_Bab, and BH_SAM[6] and in the Hebrew traditions underlying BH_Gk-Lat[7];

· the rather obvious fact that BH_Qum is highly Aramaized[8] and is overlaid by a pronunciation tradition that is probably descended not from BH but from one or more contemporaneous dialects; and,

· the high degree of overall similarity between TH and BH_Pal, BH_Bab[9] and Jerome's Latin transliterations[10].

it seems most practical that derivations should be traced -

i) from *Proto-Semitic (PS) to *Proto-Northwest Semitic (PNWS) to *Proto-Hebrew (PH) to Classical Biblical Hebrew (CBH, */EBHP/⁺),Post-Classical Biblical Hebrew (PCBH, */LBHP/ evidenced in the vowel letters of the Proto-Masoretic Text (PMT)); and then,

⁺) bringing in evidence for parallel lines of pronunciation tradition from (in order of importance) - Biblical Hebrew as reflected in the orthography of biblical Dead Sea Scrolls (BH_Qum); Biblical Hebrew as reflected in Greek and Latin transcriptions (BH_Gk-Lat); Biblical Hebrew pointed with Palestinian Vocalization (BH_Pal); Biblical Hebrew pointed with Babylonian Vocalization (BH_Bab); and, the range of modern pronunciations. A superb example of how this is done by a master is seen in Ben-Ḥayyim 1954. A good schematic outline of the vowel systems of Proto-Hebrew, Secunda Hebrew, Tiberian, Babylonian, and Palestinian Hebrew and Samaritan Hebrew is provided in the Wikipedia article Biblical Hebrew Phonology which also gives a condensed outline of the changes in the vowel system over the history of the Hebrew language.

2. What We Can Learn From the Greek and Latin Transliterations

i) historic distinctions of consonant and vowel length were still maintained in the Hebrew underlying the Secunda. The MT only preserves the historic distinctions of consonant length;

ii) The sound shifts ḫ >ḥ and ġ >^c (see Polyphonic Letters ח ע ) had not occurred in the Hebrew underlying the Septuagint Torah ( c. early third c. BCE) but had occurred in the Hebrew underlying the Secunda. These mergers had occurred in the Tiberian Masoretic tradition at some time before the fixing of the MT.

Aside form occasional mention of Israelite names transliterated into Akkadian, the Septuagint (Torah early third c. BCE) provides the earliest transliteration of vocalized BH names while the Secunda (second-third c. CE) provides the transliteration of vocalized continuous text. Jerome

a. What is a Phoneme?

Box 9

Phones and Phonemes

“Modern linguistics insists on an important distinction between phone and phoneme. A phone is a sound heard or articulated in actual speech, and as such it is a physical entity which can be measured and recorded by mechanical devices. A classification of consonants as labial, dental, etc. and of vowels as front, back, mid, high, etc. accords with such an approach. By contrast, a phoneme is what is perceived to be a particular phonetic entity, and thus by definition it is an abstraction, something like the common denominator of countless phones, namely actual sounds which share certain essential features. Even one and the same speaker—and of course, different speakers of a given language —pronounces a given phoneme in numerous variations, which however are normally perceived as one phoneme, without creating any serious problem of communication.”

Quoted from Joϋon-Muraoka 1991 § 5

A phoneme is -

Ø A contrastive unit in the sound system of a particular language.

Ø A minimal unit that serves to distinguish between meanings of words.

Ø Pronounced in one or more ways, depending on the number of allophones.

Ø Represented between slashes by convention.

Example:

/b/, /j/, /o/

nb. I have not used slashes in the following tables. For convenience, the transcription is a compromise between phonemic and phonetic

b. Vowel and Consonant Length

Box 10

The Nature of Consonant and Vowel Length

In pre-medieval Hebrew, vowel[11] and consonant length probably resembled their manifestation in spoken Arabic. The following is a quote from Raja Tewfik Nasr's An English-colloquial Arabic Dictionary[12], (p. xvi)

Variations in the length of both consonants and vowels produce variations in meaning.... The difference between the short and long sounds is that the long sounds take a relatively longer time to be completely produced than the short ones. In the case of a stop, the explosion occurs after a longer withholding; in the case of a vowel, lateral, or fricative, it is continued longer; in the case of a flap, the flaps are repeated (hence the trills); and in the case of a nasal, the vibration of the vocal cords and the flow of breath through the nasal passage last longer.

As with spoken Arabic "The relative length of consonants and vowels contributes greatly to the rhythmic patterns of speech...."[13] and hence is vital to appreciating the meter of biblical poetry.

Box 11 - Were Vowel Quantity and Consonant Quantity Phonemic in BH?
“Proto-Semitic /i:/ and /u:/ were retained unchanged throughout the history of Hebrew, but /a:/ became raised and rounded by the fourteenth century BCE in all or most environments. The evidence of the Tiberian reading tradition … suggests that there were two raised and rounded allophones of /a:/ which in one instance yielded doublets ḳan:o’ = ḳan:å’ ‘zealous’. "Eventually, the inherited short vowels also developed allophones as did the up-gliding diphthongs: [å:] and [ä] from /a/; and [o:], [o] and [å] from /u/; [e:], [e], and [ä] from /i/; [o:] from /aw/; [e:] and [ä:] from /ay/. The merger of some of these allophones resulted in a completely reorganized system in which the number of contrastive qualities was doubled and the role of quantity was greatly reduced. "Long [i:] and [u:] are in complementary distribution with [y] and [w], respectively, and alternate with them, e.g. [ˈkäli:] ‘vessel’ ~ [kälyәˈkå] ‘your vessel’, [ˈpi:hu:] ~ [ˈpi:w] ‘his mouth’, [ˈśäku:] ‘lookout point’~ [śäkˈwi:] ‘rooster’, [yištaḥăˈwä:] ‘he will prostrate himself’ ~ [way:išˈtaḥu:] ‘and he prostrated himself’. It is thus possible that the semivowels should be viewed as allophones of vowels rather than consonantal phonemes…." "Outside of closed unstressed syllables, which excluded long vowels, Ancient Hebrew had a contrast between long and short vowels. However, between the tannaitic period and the time of the Masoretes, short vowels in stressed syllables lengthened, erasing the contrast in those syllables. Thus, while Hebrew was still a spoken language, the o of infinitival yåˈko(^w)l ‘be able’ was long, while the o of sg. 3m. perfect yåˈkol ‘he was able’ was short, like the ancestor of å in yәkålˈtäm. In the Pre-Tiberian reading tradition, the o of sg. 3m. perfect yåˈkol lengthened, splitting off from the ancestor of å in yәkålˈtäm and merging with the long o of infinitival yåˈko^wl[14]. "As a result of this change, length became to a large extent conditioned by stress[15]. Outside of opened unstressed syllables (where a length contrast survived), there was a simple rule: stressed vowels are long and unstressed vowels are short. Non-systematic representation of vowel length through the use of matres lectionis … developed in Standard Biblical Hebrew. These vowel letters are used to mark not only etymologically long vowels but also stressed vowels in pre-pausal[16] position. In the Tiberian reading tradition, such vowels were probably no longer than other stressed vowels, but morphophonemic alterations show that a length difference had once existed, e.g. tiškab ~ tiškåb < *tiškab ~ *tiškāb, yәšal:aḥ ~ yәšal:eaḥ < *yišal:eḥ ~ *yišal:ēḥ. "Consonant length (like vowel length) was phonemic in Proto-Hebrew, but it was not represented in the biblical period, even in an unsystematic way. Thus, the spelling ^crwmym was used for both members of the minimal pair Job 5:12 [^căru:mi:m עֲרוּמִים]not =Job 22:6 [^cărum:i:m עֲרוּמִּים]‘crafty (pl. m.) not =naked(pl. m.)’. And the spelling ntnw was used for both [nåtan:u:]‘we gave’ and [nåtănu:]‘they gave’. It is only in Mishnaic Hebrew that representation of consonant length began to appear…. "Most of the Proto-Hebrew minimal pairs are no longer valid for the Tiberian system…. The fact remains, however, that the Masoretes considered consonant length important enough to create a sign for it (“strong” dagesh). Two minimal pairs noted by the Masoretes themselves are Job 5:12 ^căru^wmi^ym (עֲרוּמִים)not =Job 22:6 ^căru^wm:i^ym (עֲרוּמִּים) (see above)and Lev. 7:30 tәbi^y’ä^ynå^h (תְּבִיאֶינָה) not =Lev. 6:14 tәbi^y’än:å^h (תְּבִיאֶנָּה) ‘ they (f.) shall bring not = you/she shall bring it’. Although Arabic transcriptions suggest that, in the first pair, the vowel preceding the lengthened consonant was shorter than the vowel preceding its unlengthened counterpart, the Masoretes clearly considered this difference to be secondary, unworthy of being represented.”[17] "In the tradition of Hebrew that was adopted by the Tiberian Masoretes, the following vowel quality shifts took place some time before the Masoretic period: *e:ē >* **ɛ:ē, a:ā > a:ɔ̄. The result was the emergence of four vowel qualities (ɛ, e, a, ɔ) from an original two (e, a). The signs ṣere and qameṣ in Tiberian Hebrew represent vowels that were long e and a respectively before the operation of the quality shifts. The signs segol and pataḥ in Tiberian Hebrew represent vowels that were short e and a respectively before the operation of the quality shifts. "At some stage after these quality shifts had taken place, vowel length became totally dependent on stress and syllabic structure[18]. All stressed vowels and all vowels in an unstressed open syllable were pronounced long[19]. As a result not only qameṣ and ṣere but also pataḥ and segol were pronounced long when stressed or when in an open syllable.** "At some stage after vowel length became dependent on stress and syllable structure, long and short o developed into two distinct qualities: o:ō > ɔ:ō. For this reason long ō occurs only in stressed or unstressed open syllables whereas short ɔ occurs only in unstressed closed syllables."[20] [21]

Box 11 - Were Vowel Quantity and Consonant Quantity Phonemic in BH?

“Proto-Semitic /i:/ and /u:/ were retained unchanged throughout the history of Hebrew, but /a:/ became raised and rounded by the fourteenth century BCE in all or most environments. The evidence of the Tiberian reading tradition … suggests that there were two raised and rounded allophones of /a:/ which in one instance yielded doublets ḳan:o’ = ḳan:å’ ‘zealous’.

"Eventually, the inherited short vowels also developed allophones as did the up-gliding diphthongs: [å:] and [ä] from /a/; and [o:], [o] and [å] from /u/; [e:], [e], and [ä] from /i/; [o:] from /aw/; [e:] and [ä:] from /ay/. The merger of some of these allophones resulted in a completely reorganized system in which the number of contrastive qualities was doubled and the role of quantity was greatly reduced.

"Long [i:] and [u:] are in complementary distribution with [y] and [w], respectively, and alternate with them, e.g.
[ˈkäli:] ‘vessel’ ~ [kälyәˈkå] ‘your vessel’, [ˈpi:hu:] ~ [ˈpi:w] ‘his mouth’, [ˈśäku:] ‘lookout point’~ [śäkˈwi:] ‘rooster’, [yištaḥăˈwä:] ‘he will prostrate himself’ ~ [way:išˈtaḥu:] ‘and he prostrated himself’. It is thus possible that the semivowels should be viewed as allophones of vowels rather than consonantal phonemes…."

"Outside of closed unstressed syllables, which excluded long vowels, Ancient Hebrew had a contrast between long and short vowels. However, between the tannaitic period and the time of the Masoretes, short vowels in stressed syllables lengthened, erasing the contrast in those syllables. Thus, while Hebrew was still a spoken language, the o of infinitival yåˈko(^w)l ‘be able’ was long, while the o of sg. 3m. perfect yåˈkol ‘he was able’ was short, like the ancestor of å in yәkålˈtäm. In the Pre-Tiberian reading tradition, the o of sg. 3m. perfect
yåˈkol lengthened, splitting off from the ancestor of å in yәkålˈtäm and merging with the long o of infinitival
yåˈko^wl[14].

"As a result of this change, length became to a large extent conditioned by stress[15]. Outside of opened unstressed syllables (where a length contrast survived), there was a simple rule: stressed vowels are long and unstressed vowels are short.

Non-systematic representation of vowel length through the use of matres lectionis … developed in Standard Biblical Hebrew. These vowel letters are used to mark not only etymologically long vowels but also stressed vowels in pre-pausal[16] position. In the Tiberian reading tradition, such vowels were probably no longer than other stressed vowels, but morphophonemic alterations show that a length difference had once existed, e.g. tiškab ~ tiškåb < *tiškab ~ *tiškāb, yәšal:aḥ ~ yәšal:eaḥ < *yišal:eḥ ~ *yišal:ēḥ.

"Consonant length (like vowel length) was phonemic in Proto-Hebrew, but it was not represented in the biblical period, even in an unsystematic way. Thus, the spelling ^crwmym was used for both members of the minimal pair Job 5:12 [^căru:mi:m עֲרוּמִים]not =Job 22:6 [^cărum:i:m עֲרוּמִּים]‘crafty (pl. m.) not =naked(pl. m.)’. And the spelling ntnw was used for both [nåtan:u:]‘we gave’ and [nåtănu:]‘they gave’. It is only in Mishnaic Hebrew that representation of consonant length began to appear….

"Most of the Proto-Hebrew minimal pairs are no longer valid for the Tiberian system…. The fact remains, however, that the Masoretes considered consonant length important enough to create a sign for it (“strong” dagesh). Two minimal pairs noted by the Masoretes themselves are Job 5:12 ^căru^wmi^ym (עֲרוּמִים)not =Job 22:6 ^căru^wm:i^ym (עֲרוּמִּים) (see above)and Lev. 7:30 tәbi^y’ä^ynå^h (תְּבִיאֶינָה) not =Lev. 6:14
tәbi^y’än:å^h (תְּבִיאֶנָּה) ‘ they (f.) shall bring not = you/she shall bring it’. Although Arabic transcriptions suggest that, in the first pair, the vowel preceding the lengthened consonant was shorter than the vowel preceding its unlengthened counterpart, the Masoretes clearly considered this difference to be secondary, unworthy of being represented.”[17]

"In the tradition of Hebrew that was adopted by the Tiberian Masoretes, the following vowel quality shifts took place some time before the Masoretic period: e:ē > ɛ:ē, a:ā > a:ɔ̄. The result was the emergence of four vowel qualities (ɛ, e, a, ɔ) from an original two (e, a). The signs ṣere and qameṣ in Tiberian Hebrew represent vowels that were long e and a respectively before the operation of the quality shifts. The signs segol and pataḥ in Tiberian Hebrew represent vowels that were short e and a respectively before the operation of the quality shifts.

"At some stage after these quality shifts had taken place, vowel length became totally dependent on stress and syllabic structure[18]. All stressed vowels and all vowels in an unstressed open syllable were pronounced long[19]. As a result not only qameṣ and ṣere but also pataḥ and segol were pronounced long when stressed or when in an open syllable.

"At some stage after vowel length became dependent on stress and syllable structure, long and short o developed into two distinct qualities: o:ō > ɔ:ō. For this reason long ō occurs only in stressed or unstressed open syllables whereas short ɔ occurs only in unstressed closed syllables."[20] [21]

Box 12

Trade-off Between Vowel and Consonant Length

In both Hebrew and Arabic, in the words of Blau, "...rhythmically long vowel + simple consonant are more or less identical to short vowel + double consonant...."[22]

Thus pretonic gemination at times substitutes for pretonic lengthening[23].

See also

Simplification of diphthongs

Elision of word-final aleph with compensaatory lengthening of the preceeding vowel.

Interrogative Pronoun מָה

Box 13

Pausal Forms

Pausal forms in TH are probably closely related to the rhythm of formal reading of scripture[24]. In many instances they reveal pre-Tiberian stress patterns and the quality of vowels reduced to vocal šwas in contextual forms. Where appropriate I include pausal, as well as contextual forms, in tables.

Table 6 - Distinctive Vowel Length and Syllable Type in EBHP and their Reflex in TH
*Open stressed syllable*	Long /ˈhû/ (</ˈhuʾa/) "he"	Long in [TH] /ˈhu/ *[ˈhuː] "he"
*Closed stressed syllable*	Long in nouns, short in verbs /naˈtan/ "he gave": /naˈtaːn/ "Nathan"	Long in [TH] /nåˈtan/ [nɔːˈθɐːn] "he gave": /nåˈtån/ [nɔːˈθɔːn] "Nathan"
	/gaˈmal/ "he weaned": /gaˈmaːl/ "camel"	/gåˈmal/ *[gɔːˈmɐːl] "he weaned"
*Stressed syllable doubly closed in EBHP* *N.b. in TH doubly closed syllables rarely remain because of reduction of geminated final consonant and insertion of* anaptyctic vowels breaking up other consonantal clusters**	Short /ˈḥuqq/ "law" /šōˈmart/ (</šōˈmirt/) qal* a.p. fs. "guard, guarding"	Long in [TH] /ˈḥoq/ [ˈħoːq] "law" /šoˈmɛrɛt/ [ʃoːˈmɛːrɛθ] "guard, guarding"
*Open unstressed syllable*	Long/Short /sūˈgar/ "cage” /suˈgar/ qal passive PC 3ms. "it was closed”	Long in [TH] /suˈgar/ [suːˈɣɐːr] "cage” /sugˈgar/ [sugˈgɐːr] "it was closed” (syllable closed by gemination resulting in form identical to pual)][26]
*Closed unstressed syllable*	Short/Long /min-/ “from” /ˌmīn/ “variety of..”	Short in [TH] /min-/ “from” /ˌmin/ *[ˌmiːn] “variety of..”
*Unstressed syllable doubly closed in EBHP*	Short /ˌḥuqq/ "law of" /šōˌmart/ (</šōˌmirt/) qal* a.p. fs. constr. "guard of"	Long in [TH] /ˌḥoq/ [ˌħoːq] "law of" /šoˌmɛrɛt/ [ʃoːˌmɛːrɛθ] "guard of"

Table 6 - Distinctive Vowel Length and Syllable Type in EBHP and their Reflex in TH

EBHP

*/EBHP/⁺^{^[25]}

(c. 850-550 BCE)

/TH/⁺ *[TH]

(c. 850 CE)

Open stressed syllable

Long

*/ˈhû/ (<*/ˈhuʾa/) "he"

Long in [TH]

/ˈhu/ *[ˈhuː] "he"

Closed stressed syllable

Long in nouns, short in verbs

*/naˈtan/ "he gave": */naˈtaːn/ "Nathan"

Long in [TH]

/nåˈtan/ *[nɔːˈθɐːn] "he gave": /nåˈtån/ *[nɔːˈθɔːn] "Nathan"

*/gaˈmal/ "he weaned":

*/gaˈmaːl/ "camel"

/gåˈmal/ *[gɔːˈmɐːl]

"he weaned"

Stressed syllable doubly closed in EBHP

N.b. in TH doubly closed syllables rarely remain because of reduction of geminated final consonant and insertion of anaptyctic vowels breaking up other consonantal clusters

Short

*/ˈḥuqq/ "law"

*/šōˈmart/ (<*/šōˈmirt/) qal a.p. fs. "guard, guarding"

Long in [TH]

/ˈḥoq/ *[ˈħoːq] "law"

/šoˈmɛrɛt/ *[ʃoːˈmɛːrɛθ] "guard, guarding"

Open unstressed syllable

Long/Short

*/sūˈgar/ "cage”

*/suˈgar/ qal passive PC 3ms.

"it was closed”

Long in [TH]

/suˈgar/ *[suːˈɣɐːr] "cage”

/sugˈgar/ *[sugˈgɐːr] "it was closed”

(syllable closed by gemination resulting in form identical to pual)][26]

Closed unstressed syllable

Short/Long

*/min-/ “from”

*/ˌmīn/ “variety of..”

Short in [TH]

/min-/ “from”

/ˌmin/ *[ˌmiːn] “variety of..”

Unstressed syllable doubly closed in EBHP

Short

*/ˌḥuqq/ "law of"

*/šōˌmart/ (<*/šōˌmirt/) qal a.p. fs. constr. "guard of"

Long in [TH]

/ˌḥoq/ *[ˌħoːq] "law of"

/šoˌmɛrɛt/ *[ʃoːˌmɛːrɛθ]
"guard of"

Table 7 - Phonemic Status of Vowel and Consonant Length and Quality and of Word Stress over the History of the Hebrew Language
*Phase*	*Date*	*Examples* *(phonemically presented)*
*BHA phase 1* (PNWS)	c. 2000 - c. 1200 BCE	/ˈ^cālamu/ > /ˈ^cōlamu/ /šaˈlāmu/ > /šaˈlōmu/ /ˈqāṭilu/ > /ˈqōṭilu/ (ms. a.p. qal) /ˈqāṭiltu/ > /ˈqōṭiltu/ (fs. a.p. qal) /paˈqīdu/ /ˈ’amara/ (“he said”) /ˈ’amarū/ (“they said”)
*BHA phase 2* (*PH)*	c. 1200 - c. 1000 BCE	/^cōˈlamu/ /šaˈlōmu/ /qōˈṭilu/ (ms. a.p. qal) /qōˈṭiltu/ (fs. a.p. qal) /paˈqīdu/ /’aˈmara/ /’aˈmarū/
*BHA phase 3* (*/EBHP/⁺) (note non-spirantization of the bgdkpt* consonants)	c. 1000 - c. 500 BCE	/^cōˈlaːm/ /šaˈlōm/ /qōˈṭeːl/ (ms. a.p. qal) /qōˈṭilt/ (f.s. a.p. qal) /paˈqīd/ /’aˈmar/ /’aˈmarū/
BHA phase 4 (/LBHP/)	c. 500 BCE – c. 200 CE	/^cōˈlaːm/ /šaˈlōm/ /qōˈṭẹːl/ (ms. a.p. qal) /qōˈṭɛlt/ (fs. a.p. qal) /paˈqīd/ /’aˈmar/ /’aˈmarū/
*BHA phase 6* **(/TH/⁺* [TH]***)	c. 850 CE	/^coˈlåm/ [^coːˈlɔːm] /šåˈlom/ [ʃɔːˈloːm] /qoˈṭẹl/ [qoːˈṭẹːl] (ms. a.p. Part. qal) /qoˈṭɛlɛt/ [qoːˈṭɛːlɛθ] (fs. a.p. qal) /påˈqid/ [pɔːˈqiːð] /ʾåˈmar/ [ʔɔːˈmɐːr] /ʾåmәˈru/ [ʔɔːmәˈruː]
No Phonetic distinction in length of vowels *(IH*)	Current Israeli Hebrew	/oˈlam/ /šaˈlom/ /koˈtɛl/ (ms. a.p. qal) /koˈtɛlɛt/ (fs. a.p. qal) /paˈqid/ /aˈmar/ /amˈru/

Table 8 Phonemic Status and Phonetic Realization of Vowel and Consonant Length in EBHP , TH and BH_IH
/min/	/min/ [mɪn] “from”	מִן־ /min/ [min]	[min]	PH – vowel length EBHP - vowel length, stress TH – spelling, stress and context IH – spelling and context
/mīn/	/ˌmīn/ [ˌmiːn] “variety of..”	מִין /ˌmin/ [ˌmiːn]	[min]
/ˈšitu/ √ŠYT	/ˈšeːt/ [ˈʃẹːt] “base”	שֵׁת /ˈšẹt/ *[ˈʃẹːθ]	[ˈʃɛt]	PH – vowel length EBHP - vowel quality TH and IH –spelling and vowel quality
/ˈšītu/ √ŠYT	/ˈšīt/ [ˈʃiːt] (qal inf. constr.) “putting”	שִׁית /ˈšit/ *[ˈʃiːθ]	[ˈʃit]
	/ʾitt/ [ʔɪtt] "with"	אֵת /ʾẹt/ *[ʔẹːθ]	[ɛt]	EBHP - consonant length (gemination) and, possibly, vowel quality. TH and IH - context
	/ˌ’at/? /ˌ’it/? [ˌʔɐt]?, [ˌʔɪt]? [ˌʔɛt]? (particle indicating direct object)	אֵת /ˌʾẹt/ *[ˌʔẹːθ]	[ɛt]
אֶת־ /ʾɛt/ *[ʔɛːθ]	[ɛt]
/ˈ^cabdu/	/ˈ^cabd/ [ˈ^cɐbd]? [ˈ^cɐbәd]? “slave”	עֶבֶד /ˈ^cɛbɛd/ [ˈ^cɛːvɛð]	[ˈɛvɛd]	PH – vowel distribution and length. EBHP – vowel quality and distribution; spelling TH and IH – vowel quality and distribution; spelling
/ˈ^cabadū/ > /^caˈbadū/	/^caˈbạdū/ [^cɐˈbɐduˑ] “they served”	עָבְדוּ /^cåbәˈdu/ [^cɔːvәˈðuː]	[ɐvˈdu]
/yaˈqūmu/	/yaˈqūm/ [yɐˈquːm] “he will stand” (qal indicative)	יָקוּם /yåˈqum/ [yɔːˈquːm]	[yɐˈkum]	PH – vowel length, final short vowel and stress distinguish indicative from preterite/jussive EBHP - vowel length and stress distinguish indicative from jussive. Preterite distinguished from jussive by waC -, in this instance way, prefix. TH - vowel quality and stress for wayyåqåm IH vayaˈkam frequent but considered incorrect.
/ˈyaqum/	/ˈyaqum/[30] [ˈyɐqʊm]? [ˈyɐqo̞m]? “let him stand” (qal jussive)	יָקֹם /yåˈqom/ yɔːˈqoːm]	[yɐˈkom]
/ˈyaqum/	/wayˈyaqum/ [wɐyˈyɐqʊm]? [wɐyˈyɐqo̞m]? “he stood” (qal preterite)	וַיָּקָם /wayˈyåqǫm/ [wɐyˈyɔːqɔm]	[vɐyɐˈkɐm]
	/ˈhašmid/ [ˈhɐʃmɪd]? [ˈhɐʃmɛd]? (hiphil imp.) “destroy!”	הַשְמֵד /hašˈmẹd/ [hɐʃˈmẹːð]	[hɐʃˈmɛd]	EBHP – vowel length and stress. TH and IH - vowel quality
	/hašˈmīd/ [hɐʃˈmiːd] (hiphil inf. constr.) “destroying”	הַשְׁמִיד /hašˈmid/ [hɐʃˈmiːð]	[hɐʃˈmid]
/ˈṭabbaḫu/ > /ṭabˈbaḫu/	/ṭabˈbaːḫ/ [ṭɐbˈbaːx] “butcher”	טַבָּח /ṭabˈbåḥ/ [ṭɐbˈbɔːħ]	[tɐˈbɐx]	PH – vowel length and quality and consonant length. EBHP –vowel quality and consonant length TH - vowel quality, stress, number of syllables and residually consonant length IH - vowel quality, stress, number of syllables and consonant quality
/ṭaˈbāḫu/ > /ṭaˈbōḫu/	/ṭaˈbōḫ/ [ṭɐˈboːx] (qal inf. abs.) “slaughtering”	טָבוֹחַ /ṭåˈboːaḥ/ [ṭɔːˈvoːɐħ]	[tɐˈvo.ɐx]
/ˈḫātamu/ > /ˈḫōtamu/ > /ḫōˈtamu/	/ḫōˈtaːm/ [xoːˈtaːm] “seal”

Table 8
Phonemic Status and Phonetic Realization of Vowel and Consonant Length in EBHP , TH and BH_IH

*PH

(c. 1200 BCE)

EBHP

*/EBHP/^{^[27]}[28] *[EBHP]^{^[29]}

(c. 850-550 BCE)

/TH/⁺ *[TH]

(c. 850 CE)

BH_IH
[BH_IH] = [IH]

(present)

Phonemic distinction based on and comments

/min/

/min/ [mɪn]

“from”

מִן־

/min/ [min]

[min]

PH – vowel length

EBHP - vowel length, stress

TH – spelling, stress and context

IH – spelling and context

/mīn/

/ˌmīn/ [ˌmiːn]

“variety of..”

מִין

/ˌmin/ [ˌmiːn]

[min]

/ˈšitu/

√ŠYT

/ˈšeːt/ [ˈʃẹːt]

“base”

שֵׁת

/ˈšẹt/ *[ˈʃẹːθ]

[ˈʃɛt]

PH – vowel length

EBHP - vowel quality

TH and IH –spelling and vowel quality

/ˈšītu/

√ŠYT

/ˈšīt/ [ˈʃiːt]
(qal inf. constr.) “putting”

שִׁית

/ˈšit/ *[ˈʃiːθ]

[ˈʃit]

/ʾitt/ [ʔɪtt]

"with"

אֵת

/ʾẹt/ *[ʔẹːθ]

[ɛt]

EBHP - consonant length (gemination) and, possibly, vowel quality.

TH and IH - context

/ˌ’at/? /ˌ’it/?

[ˌʔɐt]?, [ˌʔɪt]? [ˌʔɛt]?

(particle indicating direct object)

אֵת

/ˌʾẹt/ *[ˌʔẹːθ]

[ɛt]

אֶת־

/ʾɛt/ *[ʔɛːθ]

[ɛt]

/ˈ^cabdu/

/ˈ^cabd/
[ˈ^cɐbd]? [ˈ^cɐbәd]?

“slave”

עֶבֶד

/ˈ^cɛbɛd/ [ˈ^cɛːvɛð]

[ˈɛvɛd]

PH – vowel distribution and length.

EBHP – vowel quality and distribution; spelling

TH and IH – vowel quality and distribution; spelling

/ˈ^cabadū/ >
/^caˈbadū/

/^caˈbạdū/ [^cɐˈbɐduˑ]

“they served”

עָבְדוּ

/^cåbәˈdu/
[^cɔːvәˈðuː]

[ɐvˈdu]

/yaˈqūmu/

/yaˈqūm/ [yɐˈquːm]

“he will stand”

(qal indicative)

יָקוּם

/yåˈqum/
[yɔːˈquːm]

[yɐˈkum]

PH – vowel length, final short vowel and stress distinguish indicative from preterite/jussive

EBHP - vowel length and stress distinguish indicative from jussive. Preterite distinguished from jussive by waC -, in this instance way, prefix.

TH - vowel quality and stress for wayyåqåm

IH vayaˈkam frequent but considered incorrect.

/ˈyaqum/

/ˈyaqum/[30]

[ˈyɐqʊm]? [ˈyɐqo̞m]?

“let him stand”

(qal jussive)

יָקֹם

/yåˈqom/
yɔːˈqoːm]

[yɐˈkom]

/ˈyaqum/

/wayˈyaqum/

[wɐyˈyɐqʊm]?

[wɐyˈyɐqo̞m]?

“he stood”

(qal preterite)

וַיָּקָם

/wayˈyåqǫm/
[wɐyˈyɔːqɔm]

[vɐyɐˈkɐm]

/ˈhašmid/

[ˈhɐʃmɪd]?
[ˈhɐʃmɛd]?
(hiphil imp.)

“destroy!”

הַשְמֵד

/hašˈmẹd/
[hɐʃˈmẹːð]

[hɐʃˈmɛd]

EBHP – vowel length and stress.

TH and IH - vowel quality

/hašˈmīd/
[hɐʃˈmiːd]
(hiphil inf. constr.)
“destroying”

הַשְׁמִיד

/hašˈmid/
[hɐʃˈmiːð]

[hɐʃˈmid]

/ˈṭabbaḫu/ >
/ṭabˈbaḫu/

/ṭabˈbaːḫ/
[ṭɐbˈbaːx]
“butcher”

טַבָּח

/ṭabˈbåḥ/

[ṭɐbˈbɔːħ]

[tɐˈbɐx]

PH – vowel length and quality and consonant length.

EBHP –vowel quality and consonant length

TH - vowel quality, stress, number of syllables and residually consonant length

IH - vowel quality, stress, number of syllables and consonant quality

/ṭaˈbāḫu/ >
/ṭaˈbōḫu/

/ṭaˈbōḫ/ [ṭɐˈboːx]
(qal inf. abs.) “slaughtering”

טָבוֹחַ

/ṭåˈboːaḥ/

[ṭɔːˈvoːɐħ]

[tɐˈvo.ɐx]

/ˈḫātamu/ >
/ˈḫōtamu/ >
/ḫōˈtamu/

/ḫōˈtaːm/ [xoːˈtaːm]
“seal”