User talk:Jaihare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] A Page About ME

I doubt anyone's really going to be interested in talking about little ol' me, but here's the page for you to do that, if you feel like it! :D Yonah mishael

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Yonah mishael, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. ntennis 05:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jehovah

I commend you on your patience at Jehovah. The discussion with the Jehovah's Witnesses has me rolling on the floor. They will do anything but speak the truth, and they seem the last to realize that they are making themselves a laughing stock to the whole world. Your patience with them really shows them up. How do you do it? Castanea dentata 16:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joplin

Hi man Im from Webb City , just wanted to say hi! Im also new at wiki.Good luck man with your studies. I've been going through a hard time with my personal views on faith and I heard there was an synagogue in Joplin and was wondering what it is like to participate in the Jewish community and religion. I do believe in God , but I seem to be lost in my ways. Peace!Also you can email me if you want , its one of the links on the left side of the page. :P

I don't know who this is. Do you mind leaving a name or some kind of contact info? :grin: Thanks.

Sorry about that , my email is oasiao2@gmail.com i thought you would have been able to see my email from my post.My name is Damien

[edit] Ket(h)ib(h)

Why did you make a stupid content fork on Kethib??? If you didn't like the article as you found it, the thing to do is try to improve it, NOT create a whole new duplicative redundant article! Furthermore, Biblical and Masoretic terminology as used in the scholarship of Biblical texts in the English language is NOT commonly transcribed according to modern Israeli Hebrew pronunciation. The spelling "Keri" is not generally found in scholarly articles, and will not be used for that reason. I agree that "Kethib" is maybe not the best transcription to use, but it's solidly based on old traditional rules for transcribing Biblical Hebrew / Aramaic words into English (as found in proper names in the King James Bible, for example). In the Q're perpetuum article, I preferred Ketibh, which is basically the same as Ketiv -- except that Ketiv would most often be used in transcriptions of modern Israeli pronunciation, not for transcriptions of ancient Hebrew and Aramaic words. AnonMoos 15:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC) See Talk:Kethib. AnonMoos 15:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

The older article needs to be redirected into Ketiv. If nothing else, this transliteration is both consistent -- not using two different transliteration schemes in one, cp. th and b (as opposed to the aspirated bh) -- and it also represents the sounds as they are actually pronounced by a majority of people throughout the world who use (speak, read, study, research) the Hebrew language. A major alternative to ketiv is the Ashkenazi kesiv, whose merits we should certainly debate quite apart from kethib, which is simply a bad spelling and should be redirected. - Yonah
Sorry, but "Kethib" is NOT a so-called "bad" spelling[sic] -- it's a spelling that was very common in nineteenth century English-language Biblical scholarship, and is still somewhat acceptable and occasionally encountered in modern English-language Biblical scholarship (though no longer one of the most common forms, perhaps). The names used in the article will be the names most commonly used in modern English-language Biblical scholarship -- and NOT those which you have arrived at from your personal speculations on Ashkenazi and modern Israeli Hebrew pronunciations (neither of which has had a great deal of influence on the transcriptions of Biblical / Masoretic terminology used in English-language Biblical scholarship).
P.S. Stop using the stupid brightly-colored boxes -- they're quite distracting, and do absolutely nothing to advance informative or constructive discussion. AnonMoos 01:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
P.P.S. Don't write on my user page; edit my user talk page instead (if you feel you must). AnonMoos 01:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
The Aramaic word כתיב is written in the Estrangelo script as ܟܬܝܒ. I am not a trained Aramaist. In fact, the only Aramaic that I've ever encountered is in Jewish prayer, the Bible, and the Talmud. The Jewish way of pronouncing Aramaic words follows the normative pronunciation for Hebrew, whatever is dominant in a community. Having looked at AssyrianLanguage.com, however, I see that the Tav (Heb. ת, Aram. ܬ) does have a differenciated sound in the Aramaic language: /t/ v. /θ/. However, also according to AssyrianLanguage.com, the letter Bet ܒ in Aramaic is also differentiated: /b/ v. /w/ (formerly /v/). Thus, according to proper Aramaic pronunciation, it would be [kĕθîw] or [kĕθîv], which would yield either kethiw or kethiv in transliteration rather than kethib, and the latter is still imprecise. - Yonah
Let me append this again simply to say that I am not formally trained in phonetics or phonology. I prefer the study of syntax and grammar, but phonetics and transcription are also interesting to me. I took one undergrad course in the phonetics of the Spanish language (Text: Curso de fonética y fonología españolas) and also had an introduction to the IPA and transcription as part of a course in the History of the English Language. I would like to study more into phonetics in grad school when I go to study Linguistics (though still focusing on syntactical issues more than anything else). I do not see why you are taking things personally, by the way. There has been no reason to resort to insult since the beginning of this exchange, yet you from its inception have prefaced your comments with words like "stupid," the motivation for which I have yet to understand. A little mutual respect should normally be in order in such a situation as this. - Yonah

Sorry, but it reflects my frustration over the fact that you seem to you have some relevant knowledge, but unfortunately so far you have been unable to put it to use in a way that will benefit Wikipedia -- and I don't particularly look forward to having to deal with each one of the issues you have raised (or re-raising issues where you don't seem to have understood or accepted the explanation) slowly point-by-point... AnonMoos 06:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I would prefer to work along with others, but it seems like we have JW's who want to take over the place on any topic dealing the the Tetragrammaton, posting out-moded scholarship and off-the-wall sources for their "proofs," and what are we left to but to get frustrated. I realize that is perhaps you feel about what I have done, and for that I'm sorry. I just do not understand why a transliteration that has no similarity either to phonetic representation nor to normative transliteration guidelines from the Twentieth and Twentyfirst Centuries should be the one chosen for the head of this article. Any title would be better than a transliteration based on outmoded scholarship. Surely you admit that kethib is not the most appropriate translation of the word, either from the perspective of the Aramaic pronunciation of ܟܬܝܒ ([kĕθîw], [kĕθîv], or [kĕθîβ]) or that of the Jewish pronunciation of כתיב ([kĕtîv] or [kĕsîv]). What gives kethib the premacy in this discussion? - Yonah mishael

[edit] תשובה

אני תושב פתח תקווה

יש לך דף בוויקיפדיה? אנחנו יכולים להתכתב יותר בקלות אם תשים פה את החתימה שלך. אני לא יודע מי אתה. אני רוצה שתדע שהעברית שלי יסודית. אני לא מדבר כל־כך טוב, אבל רוצה ללמוד יותר. :)
אף פעם לא הייתי בפתח תקווה. זה קרוב לת״א? - יונה \ ג׳ייסון
אני עושה עליה הקיץ הזה. אני אהיה במרכז קליטה של רעננה. אולי נתראה יום אחד. - ג׳ייסון