[Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

Fri Jul 14 10:18:30 EDT 2017

Dear colleagues,

It seems to me that we are in agreement that the unvocalized tetragrammaton should be Romanized in the 245 field as YHṾH.  For a vocalized tetragrammaton, we have several suggestions or options.  To summarize:

  1.  Romanize as YHṾH, i.e. follow the consonants and ignore the vowels in the 245.  Perhaps add a 500 note to say something like: tetragrammaton is vocalized as ______.  (A library that prefers to use variations on words for the deity could do so in a 500 note, e.g., Elokim instead of Elohim.)
  2.  If the vowels are the vowels for Adonai or Elohim, Romanize as Adonai or Elohim, i.e., follow the vowels and ignore the consonants.
  3.  If the vowels are the vowels for Adonai or Elohim, Romanize as Yehoṿah, i.e., follow the vowels and the consonants.
  4.  If it is a modern vocalization, Romanize as Yahṿeh, i.e. follow the vowels and consonants.

I think that, until we have more time to consider the question and perhaps collect some examples, we might need to deal with vocalized tetragrammatons on a case by case basis.

Best wishes,
Jerry Anne

From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu] On Behalf Of Yossi Galron
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 3:11 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

We, back in the Holy Land,  secular Sabras pronounced the All Mighty's name YHVH as Yehovah.

If our teacher was from a religious background he would correct us and say: Adonai. If he would come from a more orthodox background, he would correct us to Ha-Shem.
When we read the Shma we would say Adonai.
In any case, I am for YHVH and an appropriate 246 for variants.

On Jul 7, 2017 8:27 AM, "Freedman, Vanessa" <v.freedman at ucl.ac.uk<mailto:v.freedman at ucl.ac.uk>> wrote:
I agree with Jasmin. I can’t imagine anyone would read (or search for) the Tetragrammaton (even if vocalised) as ‘Yehovah’

Vanessa

Vanessa Freedman
Subject Liaison Librarian: Hebrew & Jewish Studies and Information Studies
UCL Library Services
University College London
Gower Street
London WC1E 6BT

Tel (Mon, Thu, Fri): +44 (0)20 7679 2598<tel:+44%2020%207679%202598> (Internal ext. 32598)
Tel (Tue, Wed): +44 (0)20 7679 4405<tel:+44%2020%207679%204405> (Internal ext. 34405)
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7679 7373<tel:+44%2020%207679%207373>
E-mail: v.freedman at ucl.ac.uk<mailto:v.freedman at ucl.ac.uk>
Twitter: @UCLHJSLibrary @vrfreedman
Website: www.ucl.ac.uk/library<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ucl.ac.uk_library&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=Yq03sEwFiLkQcPqmuNfJcAbQbJB4H8l0cQrqmkpmtwE&s=N2i3H4YzmIxEQme4pheeTnibq-6D0_XkHVY56D8bbj8&e=>

**Please remember the environment and only print this if necessary**

From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu>] On Behalf Of Shinohara, Jasmin
Sent: 06 July 2017 16:28
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

I don’t think that formulation is clear, Jerry Anne. Typically, where vowels are supplied, it is to indicate whether the Name should be pronounced as Ado-nai or as Elokim. To say “it should be Romanized with the vowels as given in the source” may imply using the YHṾH consonants with the addition of the supplied vowels, but those consonants are not (typically) intended to be pronounced. I think if the vocalization is given, that form (Ado-nai or Elokim) should be in the 245 with the addition of YHṾH in the 246.

My half cent. Jasmin

From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces+jshino=pobox.upenn.edu at lists.osu.edu] On Behalf Of Dickel, Geraldine
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 11:17 AM
To: rtalbott at library.berkeley.edu<mailto:rtalbott at library.berkeley.edu>; Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

Good question.  If the vowels are supplied should the Tetragrammaton be Romanized with the vowels?

Should the HCM say: The unvocalized Tetragrammaton, יהוה, should be Romanized YHṾH.  If the Tetragrammaton is vocalized it should be Romanized with the vowels as given in the source.”

Thoughts?

Best,
Jerry Anne

From: Robert M. TALBOTT [mailto:rtalbott at library.berkeley.edu]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 10:58 AM
To: Dickel, Geraldine <geraldine.dickel at yale.edu<mailto:geraldine.dickel at yale.edu>>; Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

Well, it's been lost in the dust up, but what about cases where vowels are supplied?  Or is the Tetragrammaton always YHVH in all instances, euphemistic added entries not with standing?

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Dickel, Geraldine <geraldine.dickel at yale.edu<mailto:geraldine.dickel at yale.edu>> wrote:
I have added: “The Tetragrammaton, יהוה, should be Romanized YHṾH.” to page 32 of the HCM under Names of the Divinity.  Jasmin has also added it to the Romanization FAQ document on the AJL RAS Cataloging wiki.

Thank you,
Jerry Anne

From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces+geraldine.dickel<mailto:heb-naco-bounces%2Bgeraldine.dickel>=yale.edu at lists.osu.edu<mailto:yale.edu at lists.osu.edu>] On Behalf Of Robert M. TALBOTT
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 5:31 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

Thanks folks.

Is there any chance we could get a transliteration advisory covering this included in the HCM? 'Twould be quite handy for those few times it actually happens.

B

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Judith Zupnick <judiezup at msn.com<mailto:judiezup at msn.com>> wrote:

I agree with Joan.

________________________________
From: Heb-naco <heb-naco-bounces+judiezup=msn.com at lists.osu.edu<mailto:msn.com at lists.osu.edu>> on behalf of Joan Biella <jbiella2632 at gmail.com<mailto:jbiella2632 at gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 1:39 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

I agree with Aaron, and would advocate for YHVH (subscript dot under V) as the least controversial way to deal with this situation.
Joan

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Kuperman, Aaron <akup at loc.gov<mailto:akup at loc.gov>> wrote:
Assuming there are no nekudot, would it not be presumptuous for a cataloger to claim to know how it would be pronounced.

Aaron Kuperman, LC Law Cataloging Section.
This is not an official communication from my employer

From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces+akup<mailto:heb-naco-bounces%2Bakup>=loc.gov at lists.osu.edu<mailto:loc.gov at lists.osu.edu>] On Behalf Of Robert M. TALBOTT
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 3:49 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: [Heb-NACO] Transliterating yud heh vav heh

Hi folks:

I'm cataloging a book right now that has the tetragrammaton in the title.

1) YHVH? This is what the record has
2) Yehovah? My preference
3) Yahveh? As good as any other
4) Or should we use a euphemism,e.g ha-Shem?

I'm not invested in this one and am agnostic as to the outcome, but which form is preferred? The euphemism 'ha-Shem" and "Adonai" are already slotted in the record as added title entries.

B
--
Bob Talbott

Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

I'm just mad about Saffron

_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.osu.edu_mailman_listinfo_heb-2Dnaco&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=8Bhpkp2UFGvtGlCIxFR2NMgooC9g5DAB6NZFqQpIiqI&s=bvQ43k4dfpfsvm3wGujVC6kPUOR8YKBlAmzlglfsMs8&e=>

_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.osu.edu_mailman_listinfo_heb-2Dnaco&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=8Bhpkp2UFGvtGlCIxFR2NMgooC9g5DAB6NZFqQpIiqI&s=bvQ43k4dfpfsvm3wGujVC6kPUOR8YKBlAmzlglfsMs8&e=>

--
Bob Talbott

Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

I'm just mad about Saffron

--
Bob Talbott

Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

I'm just mad about Saffron

_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.osu.edu_mailman_listinfo_heb-2Dnaco&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=cX-JfhQlUwhLVWvvsRM8LpRtWoJnc-1xOAkRHgoNXs0&m=Yq03sEwFiLkQcPqmuNfJcAbQbJB4H8l0cQrqmkpmtwE&s=B5AKy3Boa85HYPZHJjgctPunf3Qx2CELEZdO_fWveAg&e=>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/heb-naco/attachments/20170714/a452124b/attachment-0001.html>