First,
a word of comment on the term "realization." In describing the sounds
extant in the traditional pronunciations of Hebrew we have to deal with a
pronunciation of a literary language transmitted from generation to
generation through a reading tradition. In each of these reading
traditions specific phonetic values are given to the letters that
represent consonants and vowels, as well as to the vocalization signs
which represent vowels and some other phonological entities. These
phonetic values are called the realizations of the letters and the
vocalization signs.
The Consonants
The realization of these letters as plosives [bgdkpt] in initial position and medially after a consonant and as fricatives [vgdkft] is attested in the Middle Ages in all Arabic-speaking communities, including Spain, and in France (I. Garbell, in: Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris,
50 (1954), 232). Of the pronunciations of Hebrew extant today, only the
Yemenite pronunciation, and that of the Aramaic-speaking communities of
Zakho (near Mosul, in Iraqi Kurdistan) differentiate the plosive series
from the fricative series in the realizations of all the six letters.
Other communities have fricative counterparts for the plosive
realizations of some of the letters only, and the details will be given
here. The realization of each of the בגדכפ״ת letters in the various
communities will be presented according to the phonetic order of these
letters (that is, in the order, כ ,ד ,ת ,ב ,פ, and ג).
For the letter פ, there exist in all communities, but for the Georgian-speaking community of the Caucasus, a plosive, [p], and a fricative, [f ], realization for the hard and the soft p respectively. The Georgian-speaking community has only the plosive realization [p] for both hard פּ and soft פ. Members of Arabic-speaking communities tend to replace [p] by [f ] as the realization of hard פּ, but all these communities have both [p] and [f ] as the realizations of hard and soft פ respectively.
The letter ב is constantly, whether hard or soft, realized as the plosive [b]
by many Arabic-speaking communities (those of Iraq, Syria, Egypt,
Libya, North Tunisia, and Algeria), as well as by the Dutch-Portuguese
community of Amsterdam and by some Italian communities, such as the
community of Leghorn. In the Yemenite community, the learned members
distinguish between the plosive realization, [b], for hard בּ and the fricative realization, [v], for soft ב; other members of the community have [b], or both [b] and the bilabial fricative [β], as the realizations of the letter ב, hard or soft. Such a free variation between [b]
and [β] is found also in other communities, namely those of eastern
Kurdistan, the island of Djerba, southern Algeria and some of the
provinces of Morocco. In the Persian-speaking communities, hard בּ is
realized as [b], soft ב as either [β] or [v], and, in the vicinity of a back vowel, as the semivowel [w]. This realization of soft ב as [w]
also occurs, when it comes at the end of a syllable, in some
communities in the northwestern part of Italy. The Georgian-speaking
community has only [b] as the realization of both soft and hard ב. All the communities not mentioned here have [b] and [v] as the realization of hard and soft ב, respectively.
The
letter ת, when hard, is realized as voiceless (or fortis) dental (or
alveolar) plosive by all communities but not a few exceptions: in some
communities of Yemen, affricate [ts] occurs (mostly as a free variant of [t]). When it is soft, it is realized as [s] by the Ashkenazi communities, as interdental voiceless [ṯ]
by the Yemenite community, the Arabic-speaking Iraqi community, and the
Aramaic-speaking community of Zakho in northern Iraq; as [d] by the communities of Italy (but for the Sephardi communities of this country); and as voiced interdental or postdental [ḏ] by the Cochin community of India. All other communities have [t] as the realization of both hard and soft ת, but for some communities of Morocco which have the affricate [ts] for both hard and soft ת.
Only
relatively few communities differentiate the realization of soft ד from
that of hard ד. Soft ד is realized as an interdental [ḏ], whereas hard ד is [d], by the Yemenite community, by the Aramaic-speaking Zakho community of northern Iraq (where [z]
appears as a free variant), and by a number of communities in the
Balkan countries. The Arabic-speaking community of Iraq has [ḏ] as the realization of soft ד only in a few words: in the divine name [ʾaḏonay] and in the word [ʾeḥaḏ], "one," but only when occurring in the first verse of Qeriat Shema. In all other words [d] is the realization of both hard and soft ד in the Iraqi community.
כ is realized as a voiceless velar stop, [k], when hard, and as a voiceless velar fricative [ḵ], when soft, by all communities but for the Samaritan, who has [k] for both hard and soft כ.
ג, when soft, is realized as a voiced velar fricative, [ḡ],
by most Arabic-speaking communities, as well as by some communities of
the Balkans. The Dutch-Portuguese community has a voiceless velar
fricative, [ḵ], as the realization of soft ג. All communities not mentioned here have only one realization, [g],
for both hard and soft ג. This is also the realization of hard ג in the
above communities who do maintain this differentiation, except for
certain Yemenite communities. The communities of central Yemen have a
voiced prepalatal affricate, [ğ], as the realization of hard ג;
those of extreme eastern Yemen, and some of those of northern Yemen – a
voiced prepalatal plosive, [g'].
The Gutterals
The
letter א is realized as a glottal stop, [ʾ], in most pronunciations. It
should be noted, however, that in the Ashkenazi pronunciation, and
occasionally, but much less frequently, also in some Sephardi (including
the Italian) and Yemenite pronunciations, it may be realized as zero,
that is, it is not represented by any sound. In some Ashkenazi
pronunciations the contact between two vowels caused by the elision of א
in medial intervocalic position gives birth to a glide. In the
Georgian-speaking community as well as in some North African
communities, and in the community of Cochin (India), [h] appears as free variant of א.
The
letter ה is realized as a glottal fricative [voiced or voiceless] by
most communities. In the Italian-speaking communities its realization
is, however, zero, as that of א. In some Ashkenazi communities, as well
as in some communities of the Balkan countries, and in a great number of
communities located in the area stretching from Libya to southeast
Morocco, it varies freely with the realizations of א, that is also with
zero.
Final consonantal ה) ה with a mappiq) is realized as [h]
in the Yemenite pronunciation and in those of some other
Arabic-speaking communities. In the Ashkenazi communities and in most
Sephardi communities of Europe it is generally realized as zero. In the
Dutch-Portuguese community it is realized as [aha].
The Pharyngeals
The realizations of the letters ח and ע as voiceless and voiced pharyngeal fricatives, [ḥ]
and [ʿ], respectively, are found in all Arabic-speaking communities and
in most Aramaic-speaking communities. Most of the Persian-speaking
communities, however, have [h] as the realization of ח, and zero as that of ע .ח is realized as a voiceless velar fricative, [ḵ],
by all European communities, both Ashkenazi and Sephardi, and by the
Georgian-speaking community. ע is realized as [ʾ] or zero by all of the
European communities, with the exception of those of Italy and the
Dutch-Portuguese of Amsterdam. The latter communities have a voiced
velar nasal, [ŋ] – the sound of ng in the English word "king" –
as the realization of ע. The Georgian-speaking community has for this
letter a voiceless glottalized uvular plosive, [qʾ], in initial and final position; intervocally it is realized as a voiced laryngealized uvular fricative.
The Emphatics
ט
is realized identically to its non-emphatic counterpart, ת in the
pronunciations of the Ashkenazi, Italian, Dutch-Portuguese, and Sephardi
communities of Europe, as well as in the pronunciation of the
communities of Persia and eastern Kurdistan (in the pronunciation of the
Kurdish communities, however, a historical ט is reflected in the
quality of the phones of the word, which became emphatic). In the
Arabic-speaking communities, the Aramaic-speaking community of Iraqi
Kurdistan and in the Georgian-speaking community the realization of ט
differs from that of ת: it is a velarized dental (or alveolar) voiceless
(or fortis) plosive, [ṭ], in most Arabic-speaking communities and in the aforementioned Aramaic-speaking community; either [ṭ] or [ḍ], the voiced (or lenis) counterpart of voiceless (or fortis) [ṭ], in the Yemenite community, and [t'], a voiceless glottalized dental plosive in the Georgian-speaking community.
צ is realized as a voiceless dental affricate [ts] by the Ashkenazi, Italian, and Dutch-Portuguese communities; as [s],
a velarized hissing sound, in the Arabic-speaking communities and the
Aramaic-speaking community of Iraqi Kurdistan; as a non-emphatic [s]
– its realization being identical to that of ס – in the
Persian-speaking communities, in the Aramaic-speaking communities of
eastern Kurdistan and Azarbaijan, in the Georgian-speaking community, in
the community of Cochin (India), and in some communities of the Balkan
and North African countries.
ק
is realized identically to its non-emphatic counterpart, כּ, in the
Ashkenazi, the Italian, the Dutch-Portuguese, and the other Sephardi
communities of Europe, in some Algerian and east Moroccan communities,
and a number of Persian-speaking communities. In the following
communities ק is realized in a way different from כּ: in the communities
of central, northern and eastern Yemen it is realized as a voiced velar
or uvular plosive [g] or [ǥ]. In the communities of southwest Yemen and Aden it is realized as a voiceless uvular plosive, [q], which has, particularly in the community of Aden, a voiced uvular fricative, [
], as its variant in certain
positions. In some Persian-speaking communities ק is realized as a
voiced uvular stop, [g], which has as its variant a voiced uvular fricative [ ]; other Persian-speaking communities realize ק as [k]. Many Arabic-speaking communities and those speaking Aramaic have a voiceless uvular plosive, [q],
as the realization of ק. In the community of Aleppo, as well as in some
communities of Algeria and Morocco, ק is realized as a glottal stop,
[ʾ]; in these communities, however, this realization of [ʾ] exists
alongside with [q]. In the communities of southern Algeria and Cochin, ק has a velar, or uvular, voiceless fricative, [k], as its realization (along with the realization [q]). In the Georgian-speaking community ק is realized as a velar-uvular affricate, [k ].
The Sibilants
No
community maintains the distinction that existed in biblical Hebrew
between the phonemes represented by the letters ס ,שׁ, and שׂ. In the
Samaritan community the realization of שׂ is identical to that of שׁ; in
all other communities the realization of שׂ is equal to that of ס. Most
communities realize שׁ as an unvoiced hushing sound, [š], and ס(as well as שׂ) as an unvoiced hissing sound, [s]. Exceptions are the following:
(1)
In the northeastern ("Lithuanian") Ashkenazi and some North African
communities, no distinction was made between the realization of שׁ on
the one hand and that of ס (and שׂ) on the other, the exact articulation
of the sound representing both שׁ and ס (and שׂ) – whether [š] or a sound intermediary between [š] and [s]
– varying locally. This pronunciation, which corresponds to dialectal
features of northeastern Yiddish, tended to disappear after about 1930. A
similar phenomenon occurs in some Moroccan communities in which both שׁ
and ס (and שׂ) are realized as a sound intermediary between [š] and [s], or as [s].
(2) In some communities of Greece the realization of שׁ as [š] has a variant [s].
(3) In the communities of northwest Italy, and to a lesser extent in the communities of northeast Italy, שׁ is realized as [s].
ז is realized by most communities as a voiced hissing sound, [z]. In some Italian-speaking communities it is realized as a voiceless hissing sound, [s]; in other communities as an affricate, voiced, [dz], or voiceless, [ts].
In both categories of these communities, the exact realization of ז
depends on the position of the letter in the word. In some communities
of Morocco it is realized as a sound intermediary between [z] and [ ž].
Resh
The letter ר is realized as an apical flap or trill, [r],
by most of the Arabic-speaking, Aramaic-speaking, and Persian-speaking
communities as well as by the Sephardi communities of Europe. Most of
the Ashkenazi communities, on the other hand, realize it as a voiced
velar fricative [ḡ], or a velar frictionless continuant; some Ashkenazi communities, however, realize ר as an apical flap or trill, [r].
The Semivowels
The letter ו is realized by most Arabic-speaking communities as the semivowel [w]; in some communities of Syria and Egypt, as well as in northwest Morocco, it is realized as a labiodental voiced fricative, [v]; in the communities of northeast Morocco the realization [w] has the variant [v]; in some communities of Algeria [w] is realized as a bilabial voiced stop, [b]. In the Aramaic-speaking communities ו is realized as [w];
this realization, however, has a bilabial voiced fricative, [β], as its
variant. In the Persian-speaking communities the realization of ו is
identical to that of soft ב: it is either a bilabial voiced fricative,
[β], or a labiodental voiced fricative, [v]; in the environment of a back vowel it has as its variant the semivowel [w]. Some Italian-speaking communities realize as [v] when it comes in initial and medial position, but as [w] in final position.
All Ashkenazi communities have [v] as the realization of ו.
The letter י is realized by the great majority of the communities as the palatal semivowel [y]. Some communities have for this realization the variants [i] or [ʾi],
the particular positions in which these variants occur differing for
the various communities. In some communities in northeast Italy, י, when
occurring at the beginning of a syllable, is realized as the voiced
prepalatal affricate, [gˇ]. According to the medieval grammarians Profiat Duran and Abraham de Balmes, such was the realization of geminated י in Provence and Italy.
Gemination
The dageš forte
is realized by doubling the consonant in the Arabic-speaking
communities and the Aramaic-speaking communities of eastern Kurdistan.
However, a single consonant occurs in some of these communities as the
realization of a letter which has a dageš forte, particularly in
an unstressed syllable. Most of the
Italian-speaking communities also have a doubling of the consonant as
realization of the dageš forte; the communities of northeast and northwest Italy, however, tend to realize a letter with a dageš forte in a way identical to that of a letter not possessing a dageš forte.
All the Ashkenazi communities, as well as the Persian-speaking communities, disregard the dageš forte in their traditional pronunciations.
The Vowels
The
basic features of the vowel systems of the three major groups of the
traditional pronunciations, in their relation to the Tiberian system of
vocalization, were described above. We shall now present the
realizations of the vowels in the various pronunciations.
ŠUREQ-QIBBUṢ
־ֻ
,וּ. The Ashkenazi communities of the regions in which southeastern and
central Yiddish was spoken – that is the Ukraine, Poland, Western
Hungary, Western Slovakia, etc. – realize the šureq and the qibbuṣ as [i], or, some of them, as [ü] (rounded [i]). A realization of the šureq and the qibbuṣ as [ü], or as a centralized variant of this vowel, [u̵],
also exists in a number of other communities – in some communities of
Yemen, in Shiraz (Persia), Azarbaijan, in western Kurdistan, in some
communities of northwestern Morocco, in northwestern Italy – but in most
of these communities the realizations in question, rounded [i] and [u̵], are in fact variants of [u]. Since qibbuṣ
appears in the vocalization of the Bible mostly in closed unstressed
syllable, some scholars stated that in these communities a realization
of the qibbuṣ is found – rounded [i] or [u̵] – which differs from that of the šureq, which is [u]. But the situation is not so. Today a consistent and regular differentiation between the realization of the šureq and that of the qibbuṣ does not exist in any community.
For communities in which the difference between the realizations of the šureq (and the qibbuṣ) and that of the ḥolem was neutralized, see below.
Holem
־ֹ ,וֹ. In two groups of communities, which were geographically located quite apart, the realization of the ḥolem was identical with that of the ṣere:
in the communities of the regions in which northeastern ("Lithuanian")
Yiddish was spoken, and in the communities of southwest Yemen (as well
as in the community of Aden): in the former group both the ḥolem and the ṣere were realized as [ey], in the latter as [e]. From a historical point of view, however, there is no relation between the realization of ḥolem as ṣere
in these two groups of communities. In the "Lithuanian" communities
this realization apparently resulted from an interference of Yiddish in
the traditional pronunciation of Hebrew. In the pronunciation of the
aforementioned Yemenite communities, the realization of ḥolem as ṣere constitutes a feature of the pronunciation that prevailed in some Babylonian communities of the geonic period (see above).
The communities of the regions in which central and southeastern Yiddish was spoken realized the ḥolem as [oy], some German-speaking communities as [au], English-speaking communities as [ou]. In the communities of central, northern, and eastern Yemen – that is, in all Yemenite communities but for these in which ḥolem is realized as ṣere (see above) – the ḥolem is realized as a lower-mid rounded central vowel, [ö] (quite similar to the realization of eu in French peur). A similar realization of the ḥolem is attested in the Aramaic-speaking communities of Persian *Azerbaijan .
QAMEṢ AND PATHAḤ
־ַ
,־ָ. All the Sephardi communities of Europe, the Italian communities,
the Dutch-Portuguese communities of Amsterdam, and all the Asian and
African communities – but for the Yemenite and the Persian (to some
extent – see below) – do not differentiate between the realization of qameṣ gadol (that is, a qameṣ not occurring in a closed unstressed syllable) and that of a pathaḥ: they are both realized as a low front (or, in some communities, low central) vowel, [a].
This is a feature typical of the Sephardi pronunciation. In the
Aramaic-speaking communities of eastern Kurdistan and Persian Azerbaijan
a historical qameṣ gadol (which is realized as [a]) is
reflected by the emphaticization of the phones of the word in which it
occurs. All the above-mentioned communities realize qameṣ qaṭan, i.e., qameṣ which comes in a closed unstressed syllable (and which historically reflects the phoneme [u]) as [o], that is as a ḥolem. It should be noted, however, that the communities in question make two exceptions to the realization as [o] of qameṣ which historically reflects the phoneme [u], namely:
(1) A qameṣ preceding a ḥatef-qameṣ, e.g., in נָצֳמִי, is consistently regarded by these communities as a qameṣ gadol, and is realized as [a]. This realization of the qameṣ originated in the fact that these communities regard the metheg that follows a qameṣ preceding a hatef-qameṣ as indicating that the *qameṣ is a qameṣ gadol (whereas in fact it indicates that the syllable is open and that it has secondary stress).
(2) In the word כָּל, but only in two instances in the Bible (Ps. 35:10; Prov. 19:7) the qameṣ is realized as [a], that is, this word is pronounced [kal].
The reason for this lies in the fact that in these two instances the
word כָּל has an accent, and this has been taken by the communities
whose pronunciation is Sephardi to indicate that the qameṣ is a qameṣ gadol, which is realized as a pathaḥ, namely [a] (see Z. Ben-Ḥayyim, Studies in the Traditions of the Hebrew Language (1954), 71–72).
The Ashkenazi, the Yemenite, and some Persian communities differentiate between the realizations of qameṣ (qameṣ gadol as well as qameṣ qatan: no distinction is made in these communities between these entities) and that of pathaḥ. In the Ashkenazi communities the qameṣ is realized as [o] or [u]
(the latter realization prevailing in communities of the region in
which central and southeastern Yiddish is spoken). Most of the Yemenite
communities realize the qameṣ as a rounded lower-mid back vowel, [å]; the communities of Ḥabbān and Ḥāḍina in Ḥaḍramaut realize the qameṣ as an unrounded low back vowel, [ɒ]. Some Persian-speaking communities realize the qameṣ as a rounded lower-mid back vowel, [å].
ṢERE AND SEGOL
־ֵ ,־ֶ. All the communities which follow the Sephardi pronunciation have one realization for both ṣere and segol (see above).This realization is a front higher-mid or lower-mid vowel, [e] or [ε]. In some North African communities no distinction is made between the realizations of ṣere (and segol) and that of ḥireq. This applies also, to some extent, to the Iraqi community. In the Yemenite pronunciation the realization of the segol is identical with that of the pathaḥ. The Ashkenazi pronunciations are divided into two major groups as to the realizations of ṣere and segol:
(1)
The communities of the area of northeastern Yiddish (the "Lithuanian"
communities), as well as some other Ashkenazi communities, realized the segol (in a stressed syllable) as a front unrounded higher-mid vowel, [e]; the ṣere is realized as the diphthong [ey].
(2) Many communities of the areas of central and southeastern Yiddish realize the segol in a stressed syllable as [ey] and the ṣere as [ay]. No community makes any distinction between the realization of a defective ṣere and that of full ("plene") ṣere, as well as between the realization of a defective segol and that of a full ("plene") segol.
ḤIREQ
־ִ. All communities realize the ḥireq as a high front vowel, [i], with some positional variants. In eastern Yemen the ḥireq is realized as a central vowel, [ә].
THE ŠEWA
־ְ. In presenting the realizations of the šewa two points should be considered: the principles that guide the various communities in differentiating a mobile šewa from a quiescent šewa; the realizations of the mobile šewa in the various communities.
Mobile Šewa and Quiescent Šewa in the Various Communities
The
Yemenite community and the communities that adhere to the Sephardi
pronunciation, including the Italian community, regard the šewa sign as denoting mobile šewa when it belongs to one of the following categories:
(1) when it appears in the beginning of a word;
(2) when it follows another šewa;
(3) when it comes with a letter that has a dageš forte;
(4)
when it comes with the second of two identical letters, as in the word
הִנְנִי (to this rule, however, there are exceptions);
(5) when it follows, in medial position, qameṣ, ṣere, ḥolem, šureq, or ḥireq
which do not come in a syllable that has a primary stress, but may have
a secondary stress (the reading traditions of many communities regard
the metheg as a sign denoting secondary stress), and after which a dageš forte does not come (this applies mostly to the ḥireq). It should be noted that there is no general consistency as to the realizations of the šewa of this category as a mobile šewa. In Hebrew grammar this mobile šewa is known as "a šewa
following a 'long vowel'"; in the traditional pronunciation of these
communities, however, there is no consistent differentiation between
"long" and "short" vowels in accordance with the opposition between
these two categories of vowels in Hebrew medieval grammatical theory
(primarily, in the grammatical theory of the school of the Kimḥis).
Therefore, for the actual pronunciation of the communities in question
this kind of mobile šewa cannot be defined in terms of "a šewa following a 'long vowel.'"
In some Yemenite pronunciations the second of two final šewas is regarded as mobile.
In
the reading of the post-biblical literature the communities who adhere
to the Sephardi tradition disclose some deviations from the ways they
follow in differentiating the mobile šewa from the quiescent šewa in the reading of the Bible. The most prominent among these deviations is the realization as a quiescent šewa of the šewa in forms of the qatěla, qatělu, qotělim, and qotělot patterns.
In the pronunciations of the Ashkenazi communities a šewa which historically should be regarded mobile is in fact quiescent in many cases. This is always the case with a šewa coming with a letter that has a dageš forte (see above, category (3)); these communities do not geminate the consonants) and with a šewa that follows a so-called "long vowel" (above, category (5)). As to an initial šewa (above, category (1)), its realization either as a vowel (that is, as a mobile šewa) or as zero (that is, as a quiescent šewa)
depends on the phonological rules according to which initial clusters
may or may not exist in the vernaculars of the various communities.
The Realizations of the Mobile Šewa
In the Yemenite community there exist three categories in the realizations of the mobile šewa:
(1)
when it comes with a letter which is not followed by י or by a guttural
(that is, a laryngeal – א ,ה, or a pharyngeal – ח ,ע), the šewa is realized like an ultrashort pathaḥ, namely, [ǎ];
(2) when it comes with a letter which is followed by י, the šewa is realized as an ultrashort ḥireq, namely [ī];
(3) when it comes with a letter which is followed by a guttural (but is not itself a guttural), the šewa
is realized as an ultrashort vowel, whose quality is identical to that
of the vowel of the following guttural. Thus, when the vowel of the
following guttural is a qameṣ, the šewa is realized as an ultrashort qameṣ namely, [oˇ]; when it is a šureq, the šewa is realized as an ultrashort šureq, namely [uˇ]; when it is a ḥolem the šewa is realized as an ultrashort ḥolem, namely [ö].
A šewa followed by a gaʿya ("šewa-gaʿya")
is realized by the Yemenite community as a short (not an ultrashort)
vowel, its quality being determined by the nature of the following
consonant as stated above, in categories (1), (2), (3). The realizations
of the mobile šewa in the traditional pronunciation of the Yemenite community disclose complete agreement with the realizations of the mobile šewa
in the pronunciation that prevailed in the Tiberian school. To these
latter realizations a number of medieval grammatical treatises bear
evidence. Very few communities except the Yemenite have preserved the
above realizations that the mobile šewa had in the Tiberian
school: they exist – but much less consistently than in the Yemenite
community – in the Aramaic-speaking communities
of western Kurdistan. Some
Persian-speaking communities, as well as the Aramaic-speaking
communities of Persian Azerbaijan (see above) have the realization [a], or [^], a lower-mid unrounded back bowel, for the mobile sewa. This realization is identical, in quality, to category (1) of the realizations of the sewa in the Yemenite community; but whereas in the Yemenite community this realization occurs when the šewa comes in certain positions only (see above), in the above-mentioned communities it is the regular realization of the mobile šewa. The Dutch-Portuguese community realizes the šewa -gaʿya as [a] and a šewa preceding י as [i], an ordinary mobile šewa as [e].
All the communities that follow the Sephardi tradition – except the
Dutch-Portuguese community and the above-mentioned Aramaic- and
Persian-speaking communities, which can be regarded as following the
Sephardi tradition in as much as they realize the qameṣ as pathaḥ and the ṣere as segol – realize the šewa as a phone which is qualitatively identical to the realization of the ṣere and the segol. Quantitatively, the ṣere and the segol, when they come in stressed syllables, may be realized as long vowels, whereas the šewa, which does not come in a stressed syllable, is always realized as a short vowel.
In the Ashkenazi communities, the šewa, in those instances in which it is realized as a vowel (see above) is realized as [e] or [ә]. The Samaritan community has usually a vowel as the counterpart of a mobile šewa of the Tiberian vocalization.
THE ḤATEFS
The Yemenite community is the only one to have preserved the quantitative difference between the realization of a ḥatef and that of a vowel which is its counterpart, that is between ḥatef-pathaḥ and pathaḥ, between ḥatef-segol and segol, between ḥatef-qameṣ and qameṣ; the ḥatefs are realized as ultrashort vowels which are qualitatively identical with the vowels which are their counterparts – ḥatef-pathaḥ and ḥatef-segol as [̌a], ḥatef-qameṣ as [́å]. The reason for the identity of the realizations of the ḥatef-pathaḥ and the ḥatef segol is that in the Yemenite pronunciation the realizations of the pathaḥ and segol are identical.
In the Sephardi and Ashkenazi pronunciations the ḥatefs are realized as the vowels which are their counterparts: ḥatef pathaḥ is realized as [a], ḥatef-segol as [e] (or as a variant of this phone, in accordance with the variants of the realizations of the segol in the various communities), ḥatef-qameṣ as [o].
VOWEL QUANTITY
No community maintains, in the realizations of the vowels, the distinction between a "long" and a "short" vowel ("tenuʿah gedolah" and "tenuʿah qeṭtanah"),
a distinction prevalent in later medieval grammatical theory. In most
communities long realizations of the vowels occur in stressed syllables.
The Yemenite community maintains the distinction between ultrashort and
ordinary vowels, the mobile šewa and the ḥatefs being realized as ultrashort vowels.
Stress
The
communities which follow the Sephardi tradition follow, in reading the
Bible, the Tiberian rules of stress distribution, as regards both
primary and secondary stress. In reading the post-biblical literature
there are, in these communities, quite a few cases of deviations from
these rules (detailed studies as to the stress distribution in the
reading traditions of post-biblical literature in the Sephardi
communities are, as yet, missing).
The
Yemenite community generally maintains in reading the Bible the
Tiberian rules of stress distribution in words which have disjunctive
accents; words which have conjunctive accents, on the other hand, quite
frequently have stress patterns differing from those of the Tiberian
tradition. This latter phenomenon is manifest in the fact that words,
which in the Tiberian tradition have an ultimate stress ("milleraʿ"), have in the Yemenite pronunciation the stress on the penultimate syllable ("milleʿl"),
and occasionally on the antepenultimate, when they come with a
disjunctive accent. In the reading of post-biblical literature the
number of the words having a penultimate or an antepenultimate stress,
and which according to the Tiberian rules of stress distribution should
have an ultimate stress, is greater than in the reading of the Bible.
The
Ashkenazi communities do not adhere to the Tiberian rules of stress
distribution. Quite frequent is the occurrence of penultimate (or, in
some communities, antepenultimate) stress where the Tiberian tradition
has ultimate stress.
Samaritan
Hebrew has, as a rule, penultimate primary stress (with concomitant
secondary stress on the second syllable preceding the one which has the
primary stress; secondary stress may fall on the syllable directly
preceding the syllable which has the primary stress – this is the case
when the former syllable has a long vowel). It may be, however, proven
that the actual stress patterns of Samaritan Hebrew are rather late, and
that the stress patterns that Samaritan Hebrew formerly possessed were
identical with those of Tiberian Hebrew (Z. Ben-Ḥayyim, Sefer Ḥanokh Yalon (1963), 149–160).
23 Φεβρουαρίου 2022 09:20
February 23, 2022 09:20
