A question about transliterations

[Quasiblogo]

I am a non-Jew and have been studying an introduction to Biblical Hebrew. I am finding it comfortable reading the Hebrew in its right-to-left ordering. Call it “lazy eye”, but I find the left-to-right reading of transliterations to be a real distraction. Are there any transliteration works where the transliterated word that is directly under the Hebrew word is also printed from right to left and therefore also reads in that direction?

I see the logic in a transliterated word conforming to the reading order of the language of the transliterated letters, but …

 

[HARK!]

I find this free download to be very useful. It comes with some very useful tools:


Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software

 

[Quasiblogo]

Thank you, Hark!! Interesting that this Hebrew-English interlinear has the Hebrew word placement in English reading order, to accommodate the transliteration. Well, main thing is to get the Scriptures in me, so this will be very useful.

 

[HARK!]

Thank you, Hark!! Interesting that this Hebrew-English interlinear has the Hebrew word placement in English reading order, to accommodate the transliteration. Well, main thing is to get the Scriptures in me, so this will be very useful.

It renders the Hebrew scripture from right to left; but it keeps the Hebrew word order the same. This gives us insight into how the Hebrew mind works. It can be a bit cumbersome at times; but when I compare it side by side with the English rendering; I sometimes question if the English rendering is the correct rendering.

 

[daq]

I am a non-Jew and have been studying an introduction to Biblical Hebrew. I am finding it comfortable reading the Hebrew in its right-to-left ordering. Call it “lazy eye”, but I find the left-to-right reading of transliterations to be a real distraction. Are there any transliteration works where the transliterated word that is directly under the Hebrew word is also printed from right to left and therefore also reads in that direction?

I see the logic in a transliterated word conforming to the reading order of the language of the transliterated letters, but …

I don't know of any. It's probably because the letters being in English would be quite difficult (for some) to read if they were printed right to left. For example, the first word, transliterated without full vocalization, bršîṯ, would thus be written backwards in English, ṯîšrb, (if indeed this is what you are talking about). Note that the b, r, and t, are all now backwards facing when trying to read this from right to left.

However, thanks for bringing this up: I now wonder if there is a backwards English character set or font package. Now that would be pretty cool in the case of such an idea for a new transliteration.

 

[HARK!]

I don't know of any. It's probably because the letters being in English would be quite difficult (for some) to read if they were printed right to left. For example, the first word, transliterated without full vocalization, bršîṯ, would thus be written backwards in English, ṯîšrb, (if indeed this is what you are talking about). Note that the b, r, and t, are all now backwards facing when trying to read this from right to left.

However, thanks for bringing this up: I now wonder if there is a backwards English character set or font package. Now that would be pretty cool in the case of such an idea for a new transliteration.

Notice that the Greeks not only changed the order of the letters from 'right to left', to 'left to right'; but they actually inverted some of the letters themselves.

I often ponder the relationship between what was done here; and the inversions done by Satanists to this day.

Aleph: The horns (power) of the ox (headship) are now pointing down.

Resh: His head is now turned in the opposite direction.

 

[Quasiblogo]

I don't know of any. It's probably because the letters being in English would be quite difficult (for some) to read if they were printed right to left. For example, the first word, transliterated without full vocalization, bršîṯ, would thus be written backwards in English, ṯîšrb, (if indeed this is what you are talking about). Note that the b, r, and t, are all now backwards facing when trying to read this from right to left.

However, thanks for bringing this up: I now wonder if there is a backwards English character set or font package. Now that would be pretty cool in the case of such an idea for a new transliteration.

Thanks, Daq. Yes, you described exactly what I'm talking about. I see what you mean about the difficulty for some. One would have to have the hang of English pretty well. But, I'd like to think that there's enough of a market for a backwards facing transliteration--and that a publisher might be out there that is willing to go outside the box for this.

I figure that if I'm going to get in the habit of reading Hebrew in its natural, right to left arrangement, why not the transliteration as well.

 

[Quasiblogo]

A reason to wonder indeed, Hark.

 

[dani'el]

Well, you could read it in a mirror, but that might be awkward.

I agree with Hark on most of this. Interlinears are hard to understand but when you get the hang of it they can add a lot of insight to your Bible, whatever the translation/transliteration. My "Green" Hebrew/Greek/English interlinear has the typical L-R Hebrew with the literal English translation under each word. It has the Strong's number above also, and to the left it gives a column of an English transliteration. Pretty handy, but the print is very small so it is difficult to read without magnification.

If you can get to a Christian bookstore you might look at different interlinears and see what works best for you. A distant second option would be to look online, but I'm old fashioned- I like to actually hold and see what I am buying, especially something like an Interlinear.

 

[Quasiblogo]

Hard copy, here, too. Finding a decent font size sure is a challenge, though.

Hmm. Large mirror on the wall, TV in front of it, logged into the Biblehub.com interlinear. Didn’t I used to get the same effect by embarrassingly reversing a slide in those slide projector carousel trays?

 

[daq]

Thanks, Daq. Yes, you described exactly what I'm talking about. I see what you mean about the difficulty for some. One would have to have the hang of English pretty well. But, I'd like to think that there's enough of a market for a backwards facing transliteration--and that a publisher might be out there that is willing to go outside the box for this.

I figure that if I'm going to get in the habit of reading Hebrew in its natural, right to left arrangement, why not the transliteration as well.

I remembered this thread today and went looking for a reverse font, and found one called backwards, (free download here). So I downloaded it and tried it, but since of course the font will not show here on this board, I put it into a document and then took a screenshot so that I could post a picture of it in a short transliteration example.

Here it is in Genesis 1:1.

Trust me: it is not worth your time, lol.

 

[Yahudim]

Anyone remember the trick of writing cursive in the air with your right hand and mimicking it with your left, like conducting an orchestra? You end up writing a mirror image of your right hand with your left hand. With very little practice, you can write backwards with your left hand...

 

[Yahudim]

Next thing you know, you can think backwards! Hmm, probably not helpful.

 

[daq]

View attachment 317316

Notice that the Greeks not only changed the order of the letters from 'right to left', to 'left to right'; but they actually inverted some of the letters themselves.

I often ponder the relationship between what was done here; and the inversions done by Satanists to this day.

Aleph: The horns (power) of the ox (headship) are now pointing down.

Resh: His head is now turned in the opposite direction.

Have you ever done any research or studies on the Giza Pyramid, HARK? There are glyphs that have been found, which hardly get much attention or even noticed, and it seems that no one recognizes the similarity to Paleo Hebrew, (at least I haven't seen or heard anyone mention this).

Anyway I have been working on a private font, based on the available heavenly spheres characters and Paleo Hebrew, and thought this might be an opportunity to share some of it here.

(Hebrew letter Resh carved in Aswan red/pink granite, on the top-back edge of the so-called coffer in the granite chamber: certainly not done by a tourist with a screwdriver).

Image credits, videos, links, and much more here:
Rishon Megalithon

 

[HARK!]

Have you ever done any research or studies on the Giza Pyramid, HARK? There are glyphs that have been found, which hardly get much attention or even noticed, and it seems that no one recognizes the similarity to Paleo Hebrew, (at least I haven't seen or heard anyone mention this).

I have noticed similarities; and I have read of others who have noticed similarities. We are not alone. It would only make sense; as Moses was in Egypt.

I've read that the original texts had no spaces between the otiot; and that to separate complete thoughts, that the thought would begin with an Aleph, and end with a Taw.

Studying the Ancient Hebrew, as a string of otiot, starting with each ot having its' own meaning, then looking at parent roots, child roots, and so on, can be interesting.

The beauty of the otiot, is that the message remains preserved, even as the language goes through changes.

 

[HARK!]

Next thing you know, you can think backwards! Hmm, probably not helpful.

Now where did I leave those keys.....

 

[daq]

I have noticed similarities; and I have read of others who have noticed similarities. We are not alone. It would only make sense; as Moses was in Egypt.

I've read that the original texts had no spaces between the otiot; and that to separate complete thoughts, that the thought would begin with an Aleph, and end with a Taw.

Studying the Ancient Hebrew, as a string of otiot, starting with each ot having its' own meaning, then looking at parent roots, child roots, and so on, can be interesting.

The beauty of the otiot, is that the message remains preserved, even as the language goes through changes.

Yeah, I do not believe the original Asuri script was even separated, (the so-called Assyrian block script, the modern script from about the time of Ezra). The letter waw doubled as a word separator, which would have been quite difficult to read for anyone not familiar with the text, and moreover, I do not believe it originally had the final-form sofit letters either. And in addition to these things it also appears that the text was written in a form of scriptio continua similar to the most ancient Uncial (or majuscule) Greek texts.

When the text slowly began to be separated the sofits slowly began to enter into the text. I believe the texts from Dameshek (Qumran) are an example of this intermediary period where the text began to be separated. The letter waw was removed in many instances, made possible with the introduction of the sofits: the question is, was the decision always the right one? There are a few examples I have noticed where it sure looks as if a wrong decision was made compared to what we now have in the Masoretic text, (the LXX tells us a lot about how those who rendered that text were reading the Hebrew text).

 

[HARK!]

Yeah, I do not believe the original Asuri script was even separated, (the so-called Assyrian block script, the modern script from about the time of Ezra). The letter waw doubled as a word separator, which would have been quite difficult to read for anyone not familiar with the text, and moreover, I do not believe it originally had the final-form sofit letters either. And in addition to these things it also appears that the text was written in a form of scriptio continua similar to the most ancient Uncial (or majuscule) Greek texts.

When the text slowly began to be separated the sofits slowly began to enter into the text. I believe the texts from Dameshek (Qumran) are an example of this intermediary period where the text began to be separated. The letter waw was removed in many instances, made possible with the introduction of the sofits: the question is, was the decision always the right one? There are a few examples I have noticed where it sure looks as if a wrong decision was made compared to what we now have in the Masoretic text, (the LXX tells us a lot about how those who rendered that text were reading the Hebrew text).

It appears that you have studied these changes much more than I.

However, after Yah's people had forgotten about the Torah, and rediscovered it upon rebuilding the temple, I would have to question any rendering from that time forward. As we don't have that manuscript; I would say that the string of otiot would be more accurate. However, whether or not the different ways that string was broken into words, based on interpretation of the string, was more accurate or not, could be up for debate.

I believe that looking at the otiot as single otiot, and connecting the thoughts behind each ot, can give us much deeper insight.

What are your thoughts on that?

 

[daq]

It appears that you have studied these changes much more than I.

However, after Yah's people had forgotten about the Torah, and rediscovered it upon rebuilding the temple, I would have to question any rendering from that time forward. As we don't have that manuscript; I would say that the string of otiot would be more accurate. However, whether or not the different ways that string was broken into words, based on interpretation of the string, was more accurate or not, could be up for debate.

I believe that looking at the otiot as single otiot, and connecting the thoughts behind each ot, can give us much deeper insight.

What are your thoughts on that?

I definitely agree when it comes to the Paleo script, and I do think that some of the more ancient Sinai inscriptions contain a more primitive form, whether it be considered proto-Canaanite, or what have you. I found a short interesting page a while back, (primarily concerning the names YH and EL), that had some interpretations of some rock carvings. It seems the name YH began to be written in the form of a ligature sometimes, which in this case seems likely to me, for the yod being at the top and the hei being a stick with two legs make for a perfect ligature when joined together.

I will post one of the image files with the ligature name for YH circled in red, (it's an image file near the bottom of the page), and after that I'll post the link to the site.

The Names of God

This is very similar to a rock carving at Har Karkom that shows us one of the most primitive forms of the letter hei, a stick with two legs at the bottom, (basically an upside-down paleo waw or vav), and Har Karkom is surely one of the most ancient Hebrew encampments of all. Go down the page to the headings for Har Karkom below this image file and you will find what I am talking about in this same webpage.

 

[HARK!]

The Names of God

The Aleph depicts an ox head.

It can represent headship or leadership.

The lamed depicts a shepherds staff. It can be compared to a yoke.

When a farmer would till his soil for planting; he would yoke his inexperienced ox to his experienced one. He would sight a distant mark and move toward it, to keep his path straight.

When we are yoked to Al (El) ; he will keep our path straight; so that we don't stray from the mark.