[Mesorah] Hoshanot: Samech vs Sin

Sun Oct 20 12:54:04 PDT 2019

It is more complex than that.
It is clear that at one stage in Semitic languages there were three distinct sounds. A major proof is that roots with samekh in the T’NaKh have an /s/ sound both in Hebrew and Arabic, whereas roots spelling with sin always have an /sh/ in Arabic, and roots spelled with shin always have an /s/ in Arabic.
So there were three sounds (let’s call them A, B, and C), which collapsed into two in all known Semitic languages, but in different dialects and languages they collapsed in different ways.
In standard Hebrew and Aramaic, B and C (the ones written by sin and samekh) became identical. In Arabic, the ones written by A and C became identical. In Phoenician and Northern Hebrew, the ones written by A and B became identical.
Hebrewuses an alphabet developed in the north and Phoenicia, so we have the same letter for two different sounds, distinguished by the Massoretes by dots. And Biblical Hebrew uses the old spelling, even though it does not show the pronunciation.
In later Hebrew and in Aramaic, view of George Bernard Shaw, that the spelling should reflect the pronunciation, not any history, won, and so they spelled sin with a samekh to reflect that in their Hebrew it had always been the same.

---
Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer<https://whatisworkspaceone.com/boxer>

On October 20, 2019 at 3:35:38 PM EDT, Akiva Miller via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
If I  understand RSM correctly, there were three [insert correct noun here]s:

First, there was a letter he refers to as "original samekh". This is where the word was always spelled with a samekh, and still is.

In other cases, the word was spelled with a "sin form". This letter is actually a samekh, but it looks like a sin and that's very confusing. So they (whoever "they" are) decided to draw it like a samekh. But in older texts, the original appearance is kept, despite the confusion.

The third group has words that were always spelled with a sin, and still are.

RSM, would it be fair to compare that middle category to the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.m.wikipedia.org_wiki_Long-5Fs&d=DwMFaQ&c=VTwaeXjOsAHot2hQQ0nozrBJwyviuCtydNuGwYGfYiI&r=e6XbAQdGwcl_5FMtQ-t1eA&m=DDm5gz02RLGBRdyPWvLYYdouSW-f4JIb7OmHCcRXQpY&s=5onn6oIywoRHdbMqYxPfpH-EZKIhhnjZjkGSf-wWAkg&e=> in English? That letter is truly an s, but so many moderns confuse it with the f, and even ridicule it as such (as documented in that Wiki article). Similarly, these letters are truly samekh, but we mistakenly think it to be a misplaced sin when we see it between nun and ayin.

Akiva Miller

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019, 2:42 PM Mandel, Seth <mandels at ou.org<mailto:mandels at ou.org>> wrote:
It is not so much a change in spelling, but the abandonment of the sin form in writing:  if it is the same letter as samekh, better use the samekh, which prevents misreading.
You will never find an original samekh written as a sin.  The change was one way only.

Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel

________________________________
From: Mesorah <mesorah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:mesorah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org>> on behalf of Sholom Simon via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>>
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2019 2:33 PM
To: Akiva Miller <akivagmiller at gmail.com<mailto:akivagmiller at gmail.com>>
Cc: Mesorah AishDas List <Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>>
Subject: Re: [Mesorah] Hoshanot: Samech vs Sin

And in Ha'aderes v'He'emuna, we have, at the place where a samech would be: siguy (with a samech) but segev (with a sin)

Spelling did change over time . . . e.g., the word Sota -- in Torah with a sin (Bamidbar 5:12, 5:29), in Talmud with a samech, which is why Rambam is insistent on using a sin, but (most?) everybody else used a samech.

But what I thought RHT was asking about was the *pattern* he saw, rather than simply a replacement of sin/samech.

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 1:58 PM Akiva Miller via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>> wrote:
Same thing in Kel Adon and lots of other places, like last week's Al Chet - Sikur ayin and Siach sifsoseinu. I  once make a list of them, but I'm not home right now. If you want a project for yomtov afternoon,  just grab a few machzorim (don't forget kinos and selichos!) and go on a treasure hunt.

WHY and HOW this happened is far beyond me. These authors seem to have been geniuses at fancy Hebrew grammar -- I can't accept that these are rudimentary spelling errors. Maybe the "correct" spelling changed over time (like the yud that was added to David in Divrei Hayamim), but for such a great variety of words?

I'm confident that Rabbi Mandell will come along and enlighten us, but YomTov will be here soon, so I wanted to post this just in case.

Akiva Miller

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019, 1:37 PM Henry Topas via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>> wrote:
Moed Tov,

One of my congregants has asked me why in the sequence of this morning's hoshanot, phrases in the position of samech have been replaced with phrases beginning with the letter sin in the last 4 of the 7 beginning paragraphs and again in many of the later "Hoshana Rabba only" paragraphs?

Thank you and a Git Kvitel,

HT
_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.aishdas.org_listinfo.cgi_mesorah-2Daishdas.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=VTwaeXjOsAHot2hQQ0nozrBJwyviuCtydNuGwYGfYiI&r=e6XbAQdGwcl_5FMtQ-t1eA&m=J1Hjb6vq4Ks9tPPGoRq84XGb60j-VG_qdqGYGg9-8h4&s=bLyFj-Ul7Le2IOSwIgsOM1e84X2LzvwYd8Wtmz972Wk&e=>
_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.aishdas.org_listinfo.cgi_mesorah-2Daishdas.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=VTwaeXjOsAHot2hQQ0nozrBJwyviuCtydNuGwYGfYiI&r=e6XbAQdGwcl_5FMtQ-t1eA&m=J1Hjb6vq4Ks9tPPGoRq84XGb60j-VG_qdqGYGg9-8h4&s=bLyFj-Ul7Le2IOSwIgsOM1e84X2LzvwYd8Wtmz972Wk&e=>

Legal Disclaimer

The contents of this email and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. You must not use or disclose them other than for the purposes for which they were supplied. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete or destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Any privilege or confidentiality pertaining to this email and attachments is not waived by reason of mistaken delivery to you.

<ATT00001.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20191020/6c30ea43/attachment-0002.htm>