Swish

Jan 12, 2009 14:20

Since it's coming up, I'd like to make a quick PSA:

It's pronounced Tu Bishvat. Not B'Shvat, or anything like that. Bishvat.

Leave a comment

margavriel January 13 2009, 14:21:25 UTC
Im kvar prescriptive, then "tu vishvat" or "tu vishvot".

If not, then just be descriptive.

Reply

shirei_shibolim January 13 2009, 16:55:20 UTC
I tend to be prescriptive within the bounds of a language's contemporary behavior. Vernacular Hebrew does not feature a consonantal softening across word breaks except in phrases borrowed from earlier dialects. I see no profit in attempting to rewrite a dialect.

Reply

margavriel January 14 2009, 01:16:47 UTC
"I see no profit in attempting to rewrite a dialect."

Isn't that exactly what you're doing each year, when you post this PSA?

Reply

shirei_shibolim January 14 2009, 03:24:44 UTC
The difference is that the conversion of two initial sheva'in into a hiriq and a sheva is a feature of modern vernacular Hebrew. People don't say לְלְמוד, they say לִלְמוד. I'm merely correcting usage by following the forms of the dialect.

Reply

lipman_ January 15 2009, 15:04:02 UTC
Bid-yuk! Aval gam biNtanya?

Reply

shirei_shibolim January 15 2009, 15:50:37 UTC
Well, no. I'm not sure how I feel about the Israeli tendency to treat proper names as somehow separate from the rest of the language. I'd be happy to see people pronounce גרתי בבלטימור as garti bevaltimor, but I know when to pick my battles.

Reply

lipman_ January 15 2009, 16:37:45 UTC
Or gartI vvaltimOr with a "shortened" chirek? (Not that I believe in the long vs short chirek.)

But I think it's not davke about proper names vs generic nouns, but that the i in lil- infinitives is morphologised, not an automatic phonemic thing.

Reply

shirei_shibolim January 15 2009, 16:43:27 UTC
I disagree. It's an infinitive construct, and without the prefix it exists as לְמוֹד. Or if you like, בְ + שְבִיל = בִשְבִל.

Reply

lipman_ January 15 2009, 16:55:17 UTC
Nice example for what I say,: bishvil is a lexicalised phaenomenon, not even on the level of morphology anymore.

Out of very formal speeches, native speakers say "Notnim shem le-dvarim kaele", not "lidvarim".

BTW, I don't like the form tu beshvat either.

Reply

lipman_ January 15 2009, 17:05:43 UTC
Or, to use your won example, "I efshar la-lekhet be-shvil kaze," not "bishvil".

Reply

margavriel January 15 2009, 16:55:50 UTC
or gartI vvaltimOr with a "shortened" chirek? (Not that I believe in the long vs short chirek.)

"gartI": ultimate stress? why?

"v(ə)valtimOr" would be no dialect of Hebrew known to me, certainly not massoretic. When two beisn follow in a row at the beginning of a word, with shva in between, the first one is WITHOUT EXCEPTION hard, even after a final vowel. This is even true for BEIS + PEI (ואכבדה בְּפַרְעֹה), though there may be some exceptions with the pei thing.

Reply

margavriel January 15 2009, 16:57:00 UTC
שבט (however you want to pronounce it) isn't a proper name?!

Reply

shirei_shibolim January 15 2009, 17:32:09 UTC
I never said it was consistent.

Hey, if you want to pronounce it as an initial sheva you're free to do so.

Reply

margavriel January 15 2009, 17:53:06 UTC
No -- just like Lipman and you, I don't like the form bäshvat. I'm just trying to get you to figure out whether you're trying to be prescriptive or descriptive in this thread. And indeed, the answer seems to be that you're trying to be prescriptive -- yet according to what prescriptive set of rules?

Reply

shirei_shibolim January 15 2009, 21:02:22 UTC
How about this: I'm being prescriptive, but only to the extent that I think any sizable population will listen.

Reply

margavriel January 15 2009, 16:07:20 UTC
לִלְמוֹד versus לְלְמוֹד isn't a great proof, since the two would be pronounced almost identically (and, depending on the particular speaker, sometimes completely identically) -- /lilmód/ vs. /ləlmód/.

And anyway, with the infinitive, it's not really on the productive phonological level anymore, rather a morphological thing.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up