[HANASHIR:5176] Re: Kol Hanshemah

[Adrian Durlester <durleste...>]

Joel et omnes:

Aside from the issue of "correct" pronounciation (all of which is guesswork
at best, even on the part of the Masoretes) the real issue is how language
can and often does change when spoken and especially when sung. It is quite
common for words to be lengthened, shortened, have minor vowel
pronounciations changed, etc. in the process of making them "singable." In
fact, the idea of speaking "proper" Hebrew or English or whatever is a
chimera. Nobody does it, not even Professor Higgins! If anything, Hebrew is
closer than latin/romance family languages to mimicking the actual style of
usual use of a language by people in that it accounts for expected
variations in pronounciation of words and syllables based on how people
really talk, slur or rush words, etc. with dropped letters, shifted
emphasis, etc.

So, while I agree we should be sticklers about the Hebrew, and currently
being in a very advanced biblical Hebrew class, agree with your comments
about the pronounciation, I believe we need to allow the leeway of
pronounciation changes for the sake of singability.

(As a sidebar, the more I study biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, Ugaritic,
Akkadian, et al, the more scholarly disagreement I see on issues like
pronounciation. Those who would claim to asserting a definitive
pronounciation would do well to remind themselves they do so only on the
basis of a received text and received information and their claims are based
more on accumulated tradition, practice, and wisdom than academic
certainity.)

Listen to a recording of Beethoven's Ninth, and see if you can catch some
pronounciation issues with the German related to note values, melodic lines,
etc. They exist. Similar problems exist in a huge body of vocal music, and
probably in most vocal music.

One should strive for correct pronounciation, insofar as that is possible,
but I would shy away from insisting the sung music always exactly match
spoken pronounciation. Just as poets take liberty with langauge, we must
allow composer, lyricist and performer the same liberties.

Adrian
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adrian A. Durlester  -  durleste (at) home(dot)com
http://members.home.net/durleste/
Student, Vanderbilt University Divinity School
http://divinity.lib.vanderbilt.edu/vds/vds-home.htm
Music Director, Congregation Micah, Nashville, TN http://www.micahnash.org/
Home phone (615) 646-9788 Nextel cel-phone (615) 207-2661
You can page me from http://www.nextel.com
List-Owner for hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org; Co-Owner for L-Torah (at) 
shamash(dot)org
http://uahc.org/hanashir
Editor, Bim Bam (for Torah Aura Productions) http://www.torahaura.com/
Alternate Email: aad (at) iname(dot)com  adriand (at) aol(dot)com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org [mailto:owner-hanashir (at) 
> shamash(dot)org]On
> Behalf Of Joel Siegel
> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2000 2:34 AM
> To: hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org
> Subject: [HANASHIR:5175] Re: Kol Hanshemah
>
>
> SingingGr8 (at) aol(dot)com wrote:
>
> > I teach music three days a week and have been teaching both the more
> > traditional version (the one that was recently recorded on the
> last DF CD)
> > and a newer version  of Kol Ha-n'shamah.  The version that i
> most recently
> > taught starts with shiru and although i am not sure who wrote
> it the kids
> > love it (a friend taught it to me)
> >
> > Anyway, as I was teaching today I was corrected on my hebrew
> which suprised
> > me because i assumed it was kol hanishamah both because that
> was the way it
> > was taught to me and also because there is the slow version
> which says the
> > word "hanshamah" as "hanishamah" ....i looked it up and the person who
> > corrected me was right.
> >
> > I felt this need to tell everyone here about this because it is
> important
> > that we are teaching the hebrew right and this is something i
> always heard
> > wrong.  so the word should be pronounced as it is in the more trad song
> > "Hallelu" and not in the more modern song "kol Hanishamah"
>
> Would that it were that simple ("hal'vai!")  You have, perhaps
> unwittingly and
> perhaps unwillingly, entered into one of the more arcane and
> esoteric (IMHO)
> areas of Hebrew grammar, the Sh'va na' ("moving sh'va") and Sh'va nach
> ("resting sh'va).  (Some might even call it pilpulistic, but when has that
> ever stopped us?)  The sh'va nach is a true full stop (as in the first
> syllable of Yis-ra-el.)  The sh'va na' is pronounced, however....
> a bit like
> "eh," a bit like "ih," and perhaps even a bit like "uh."  You see
> it at the
> beginning of words (b'chol, l'dor, v'ahavta) and various other
> places as well.
>
> Technically, as Spiro points out (HAFTARAH CHANTING, at 87-88; this is the
> only reason I am as up on the subject as I am, having looked in
> it last night
> during the Haftara Qadma discussion).... a sh'va na' (and its accompanying
> consonant) is treated as a "semi-syllable" but it's simpler to
> regard it as a
> full syllable.
>
> Anyway, one of those "various other places" a sh'va na' appears is under a
> letter with a dagesh.... and letters that follow the definite
> article have a
> dagesh (at least I think it's a dagesh, rather than one of those
> other dots.)
> And so indeed, if you look at the last verse of Psalm 150,
> behold: the nun in
> Han'shama has a dagesh.
>
> The upshot: Han(i)shama is technically more correct, probably,
> than Han-shama.
>
> At least, I'm *fairly* sure that's correct.  There are other shards deeply
> buried in the dark recesses of my memory about other rules that
> come into play
> regarding the letter after the definite article, as well as funky
> things that
> sometimes happen with "weak" letters like Nun (which of course is
> the letter
> after the definite article in Han'shama.)  If they change things, I'm sure
> someone on the list will know.
>
> And then there's the sh'va m'rachef, which..... but we won't go there.
>
>
> > Any comments to why we have been singing it wrong or if maybe i
> am really
> > wrong now would be great.
>
> Well, that's probably more information than you bargained for, but it's my
> best shot.  Spiro is certainly not exhaustive on the subject (nor does he
> intend to be), rather he gives a quick practical 2-page
> summary.... but it was
> the reference that was handy and probably OK for present purposes.
>
> btw, the Sh'va under the first Lamed in Hal'lu is also a sh'va
> na'.  So the
> word should be pronouned Hal'lu (or hal(i)lu or hal(eh)lu,
> however you want to
> transliterate it.....) but certainly not ha-lay-lu, as some do.
>
> Remember, though: I'm not a grammarian ... I just play one on TV.
>
> Joel
>
>
>

------------------------ hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org -----------------------+