# Qomets: A or O or Æ or Ö?



## rushalaim

I've read, _Arabic _says "Yaum" as a diphthong, _Hebrew _says יום
However, Exodus 13:6 gives יָמִים
Is it any mistake, and here must be Holam in the word ימים ? Or Holam is added to יום from _Phoenician _dialect?


----------



## origumi

Semitic "yawm" = _day_ became יוֹם "yom" in Hebrew. The plural is indeed יָמִים "yamim" (long "a").
I don't think there's a Phoenician influence neither on the singular (aw -> o is the expected shift) nor on the plural (יָמִן "yamin" = _days _is attested in Moabite, far to the south, with other forms similar to Hebrew like יָמֵהֻ "yamehu" = _his days_ and יְמֵי "y(e)mey" = _days of_).


----------



## rushalaim

*origumi*, do you think, _Phoenician _shift could be only in the end of a word? Like _Arabian _"Sal*a*m" or the most beautiful _Aramaic  _שלם "Sh'l*a*m" became _Hebrew _שלום "Shal*o*m"? _Canaanite _"Shal*e*m" in Genesis 14:18(_Jeru_Shalem) or that -*e* is _Phoenician _dual?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanite_shift
It's very strange to see such a change in the very beginning of the word! Thus, that case doesn't fit to _Phoenician_ shift. The plural shows us the ancient sounding of a singular "yawm", isn't it?

I've read, that there are only three vowels: *A*, *I*, *U*. But those *O* and *E* are just late diphthongs corrupting the language.
May I assume, that the plural may help us to discover the genuine form of איש ?
איש -- אנוש -- אנשים


----------



## origumi

By "Phoenician Shift" do you mean "The Canaanite Vowel Shift" (long "a" -> "o")? Or to any of the other Phoenician shifts, e.g. the later "a" -> "o" -> "u"?

In any case, the shift in yawm -> yamim is in the opposite direction, not "a" -> "o" but "aw" / "o" -> "a".

I don't know the explanation, but can compare יום/ימים to עיר/ערים and alike, where the non-"a" vowel of the singular becomes "a" in the plural.

In regard to ירו*שלם* - I don't know if its origin is שלום (in an earlier form like shalam). Root ש-ל-מ has several nouns, meanings, forms - e.g. shalem (complete).


----------



## rushalaim

origumi said:


> In any case, the shift in yawm -> yamim is in the opposite direction, not "a" -> "o" but "aw" / "o" -> "a".


I don't understand, why _Hebrew _has Holam in singular but Qamets in plural, but _Aramaic _has Holam in singular and Holam in plural *יומין *!
Might Masorets make a mistake, they put Qamets instead of a dot above _Yud_-letter?


----------



## Drink

It's just an irregularity. Much like the even weirder בַּיִת and בָּתִּים.

EDIT:
You can also say the following are similar:
רֹאשׁ and רָאשִׁים
אֱנוֹשׁ and אֲנָשִׁים (maybe these were originally a singular/plural pair?)


----------



## origumi

rushalaim said:


> I don't understand, why _Hebrew _has Holam in singular but Qamets in plural, but _Aramaic _has Holam in singular and Holam in plural *יומין *!
> Might Masorets make a mistake, they put Qamets instead of a dot above _Yud_-letter?


In Hebrew (and apparently sister languages) it's "yamim", not "yomim". That's how we write & pronounce the word.


Added:

The Moabite / Phoenician pronunciation is reconstructed, the abjad script doesn't provide this info. Nevertheless, the spelling ימן with no ו (waw) is a clue that the "aw"/"o" is not pronounced.

I am not sure what were the rules for writing vowel "o" in Moabite/Phoenician - whether as in Hebrew they always write ו (waw) when its origin is "aw", or different. The Mesha stele has few ו and ה as matres lectionis for "o" in the middle and end of word, Phoenician inscriptions of the time seem to have them only at end of word. But I examined very few, there must be academic material about this issue.


----------



## rushalaim

origumi said:


> In Hebrew (and apparently sister languages) it's "yamim", not "yomim". That's how we write & pronounce the word.


But _Aramaic _has Holam in singular *יומא* and Holam in plural *יומין*
Why Hebrew differs?


----------



## rushalaim

Drink said:


> אֱנוֹשׁ and אֲנָשִׁים (maybe these were originally a singular/plural pair?)


I think, the root is *אנש
אנוש* (_m._) and *אנשה* (_fem._) that pair formed another pair *איש* (_m._) and *אשה* (_fem._)
That's why their have common plural *אנשים* (_m._) and *נשים* (_fem._)
It's strange, why female plural don't possess the root's letter *א* !? I assume, that female plural *נשים *is from *אשה *but *אשה *was derived from *אנוש *not directly from the root *אנש *!?


----------



## origumi

rushalaim said:


> But _Aramaic _has Holam in singular *יומא* and Holam in plural *יומין*
> Why Hebrew differs?


Arabic أيام ayam seems to go with Hebrew.


----------



## Drink

origumi said:


> Arabic أيام ayam seems to go with Hebrew.



From what I have read أيام ('ayyaam) is an assimilation of أيوام ('aywaam), which is a one of the possible regular plural formations for يوم (yawm), so I think it is just a coincidence that it resembles the Hebrew.


----------



## origumi

The Siloam Inscription, Lachish Letters, Arad Letters, the word יום "yom"/"ywm" is spelled ים "ym". Same in Ugaritic and Phoenician. I think that most scholars say it's pronounced "yom", although an alternative of two words "yom" and "yam" side-by-side is also mentioned (e.g. by W. R. Garr). In Epigraphic South Arabian both spellings "ywm" and "ym" are attested.


----------



## Drink

Compare that to בית being spelled בת and שנה as שת in the same period.


----------



## origumi

Drink said:


> Compare that to בית being spelled בת and שנה as שת in the same period.


I don't know if there's a root cause, or each word has a different story. Also, not sure it all happened in the same period (of 1000-700 BC or so) or started much earlier.

For בת bat < *bant(?) the shift of "i" (as in Arabic "bint") to "a" is in both singular and plural.
שנה shana vs. shat < *shant(?) looks like preserving the Semitic final "t" for feminine + assimilation of the "n" in the "t".



> From what I have read أيام ('ayyaam) is an assimilation of أيوام ('aywaam), which is a one of the possible regular plural formations for يوم (yawm), so I think it is just a coincidence that it resembles the Hebrew.


I don't say Arabic and Hebrew experienced this change together, it's likely to have happened separately. But we may learn from one on the other, suggest a similar mechanism, especially for the uncommon drop of "w"/"o".


----------



## Drink

origumi said:


> I don't know if there's a root cause, or each word has a different story. Also, not sure it all happened in the same period (of 1000-700 BC or so) or started much earlier.



I only meant that inscriptions from the same general era also use the spellings I pointed out. I wasn't trying to point out when anything "happened".



origumi said:


> For בת bat < *bant(?) the shift of "i" (as in Arabic "bint") to "a" is in both singular and plural.



I was talking about bayit (house), not bat (daughter).



origumi said:


> I don't say Arabic and Hebrew experienced this change together, it's likely to have happened separately. But we may learn from one on the other, suggest a similar mechanism, especially for the uncommon drop of "w"/"o".



I guess you may be right. I could see if Hebrew originally had יְוָמִים as the plural, the w could have been dropped.


----------



## rushalaim

Is there any kind of a rule? I see similar cases with the word  *כל*
It is often written with _Qamets _as  *כָל* , and quite rare with _Holam _as *כֹל*
_Aramaic _uses *כֹל* even much rarely than _Hebrew_. Aramaic prefers more _Qamets _as *כָל*


----------



## origumi

rushalaim said:


> Is there any kind of a rule? I see similar cases with the word  *כל*
> It is often written with _Qamets _as  *כָל* , and quite rare with _Holam _as *כֹל*


The root here is k-l-l so it's a different gizra and a different story.


----------



## Drink

rushalaim said:


> Is there any kind of a rule? I see similar cases with the word  *כל*
> It is often written with _Qamets _as  *כָל* , and quite rare with _Holam _as *כֹל*
> _Aramaic _uses *כֹל* even much rarely than _Hebrew_. Aramaic prefers more _Qamets _as *כָל*



It's a qamatz qatan, which is a short o. In the construct state, which is the most common one for this word, the long o (holam) is shortened to a short o (qamatz qatan).

In ימים, you have a qamatz gadol, which is a long a and an entirely different story.


----------

