# Transliterating the definite article with a word



## Diadem

Hi,

I just had another question whenever someone has time, if they don't mind.

When you're transliterating the definite article (הַ), say for example, with a word like shamayim [שָׁמַיִם], how does the Academy say to do it?

Is it ha*-*shamayim (with the dash separating "ha" and "shamayim")?
Is it ha*shsh*amayim (with the shin doubled)?
Is it hashamayim (no doubling of the shin)?

In a grammar book written by a non-Jew, he says the shin would be doubled when transliterated. But, I never see any word actually transliterated that way. I'm wondering how it's actually done in Israel by regular people.

Thanks.


----------



## Gadyc

Line (2) is wrong.
The definite article is generally folowed by a dagesh hazak,  so the consonant is emphasized. 
This is not doubling the letter just a stress. In colloquial you will rarely hear this stress.
The error of line (2) is because another usage of Dagesh Hazak is to avoid a double consonant that would be hardly pronounced (i.e כרתי instead of כרתתי).

i dont think that there is a preference between (1) and (3), just if you like hyphens.


----------



## amikama

According to the new rules of transliteration of the Academia (found in this file):

- Letters with dagesh hazak are doubled, except the digraphs (sh, ts).
- After ה' הידיעה the letter is never doubled, despite the dagesh hazak.
- The מש"ה וכל"ב letters are not separated from the following word, but the first letter of the word is capitalized, e.g. היוגב --> HaYogev. 

Thus the transliteration of השמים --according to the Academia-- is _hashamayim_ (or _HaShamayim _with capitalization). But as Gadyc said, among the regular Israelis there is no preference between _hashamayim _and _ha-shamayim_ (_hashshamayim _is wrong in any case).


----------



## aruquon

Diadem said:


> Hi,
> 
> In a grammar book written by a non-Jew, he says the shin would be doubled when transliterated. But, I never see any word actually transliterated that way. I'm wondering how it's actually done in Israel by regular people.
> 
> Thanks.



In Israeli Hebrew this consonant doubling (after the definite article or anywhere else) is never pronounced. If the author of that book was describing a more classical style of Hebrew it might make sense to indicate doubled/emphasized consonants in some way (though i would prefer ssh to shsh, personally), but in Israeli Hebrew it is pretty much irrelevant.


----------



## hadronic

What about doubling after מ ?  Mibboker  =  מבוקר ?


----------



## hadronic

Gadyc said:


> Line (2) is wrong.
> The definite article is generally folowed by a dagesh hazak, so the consonant is emphasized.


 
Line (2) is not plain "wrong". 
The academy decided not to transcribe the doubling for the specific case for esthaetical reason, but the doubling is still there.

Taken out from the internet :
wayyō'mer 'ĕlōhîm yiqqāwû *hammayim* mitaḥaṯ *haššāmayim* 'el-māqwōm 'eḥāḏ 

And, just for clarity : in any mean, the consonant is not "emphasized". In semitics, this word gets a very precise meaning....


----------



## amikama

hadronic said:


> What about doubling after מ ?  Mibboker  =  מבוקר ?


Same for ה' הידיעה. _miboker_ (no doubling).


----------



## aruquon

hadronic said:


> What about doubling after מ ?  Mibboker  =  מבוקר ?



In Israeli Hebrew the b would be not be pronounced as double or emphatic in this case (or in any other case).


----------



## hadronic

aruquon said:


> In Israeli Hebrew the b would be not be pronounced as double or emphatic in this case (or in any other case).


 
We're talking about orthography, not pronunciation. English also does have double letters pronounced as one.

And once again, emphasis has nothing to do with our matter here.


----------

