http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=11129672


in reply to Re^7: String Comparison & Equivalence Challenge
in thread String Comparison & Equivalence Challenge

Good question. They were two different people, and, perhaps because of this, the Masoretes added a different set of vowels/pronunciation marks to each of the two in the original Hebrew. The actual Hebrew consonants between the two words are the same. I suppose it would be a little like Freddie vs. Freddy -- they're basically the same name, but represent two different people; or maybe Rebekah vs. Rebecca, etc.

Blessings,

~Polyglot~

  • Comment on Re^8: String Comparison & Equivalence Challenge

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: String Comparison & Equivalence Challenge
by LanX (Sage) on Mar 15, 2021 at 14:49 UTC
    Which two people please?

    This looks rather like a transcription problem, probably caused by using Greek in between Hebrew and English.

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery

      I think you must be right, or the two spellings would not occur in such similar contexts.

      select substring(cmp.sim::text,1,5) sim , k1.text || chr(10) || k2.text || chr(10) as "txt1 vs txt2" , k1.book || ':' || k1.chapter || ':' || k1.verse || chr(10) || k2.book || ':' || k2.chapter || ':' || k2.verse "location" from kjv_simil_0_25 cmp join kjv k1 on id1=k1.id join kjv k2 on id2=k2.id where sim >= 0.5 and k1.text ~ 'Ashchenaz|Ashkenaz' and k2.text ~ 'Ashchenaz|Ashkenaz' order by 1 desc ; sim | txt1 vs txt2 | +location ------+------------------------------------------------------------+-- +------ 0.86 | And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz and Riphath and Togarmah. +| 1 +:10:3+ | And the sons of Gomer; Ashchenaz and Riphath and Togarmah.+| 1 +3:1:6 | | 0.86 | And the sons of Gomer; Ashchenaz and Riphath and Togarmah.+| 1 +3:1:6+ | And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz and Riphath and Togarmah. +| 1 +:10:3 | | (2 rows) Time: 6.959 ms

        It would appear that the spelling difference is related to the time of writing. There is an earlier spelling, and a later spelling. The earlier spelling was applied to a person who was also mentioned at a later date with the alternate spelling, and that second spelling was used for a separate individual as well.

        In Hebrew, the two words are almost identical. If you don't put your glasses on, they might appear so. Here they are:

        אַשְׁכֲּנַ֥ז

        אַשְׁכְּנָ֑ז

        Blessings,

        ~Polyglot~

      The first mention is of a son of Gomer:

      "And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah." (Genesis 10:3)

      The later individualkingdom (I see now that I have earlier misspoken) referenced by this name is evident here:

      "Set ye up a standard in the land, blow the trumpet among the nations, prepare the nations against her, call together against her the kingdoms of Ararat, Minni, and Ashchenaz; appoint a captain against her; cause the horses to come up as the rough caterpillers." (Jeremiah 51:27)

      Blessings,

      ~Polyglot~

        > a son of Gomer:

        That's just a personification of the same tribe, much like Britannia or Marianne

        If one believes that all humans are descendants of Noah and one lives in a patriarchal tribal society, one needs to come up with a pedigree.

        So all Semites derive from Shem, all Hamites from Ham , etc...

        Ashkenaz is most probably a variation/transcryptian of "Scythian", Iranian rider nomads who were said to rule Eastern Europe, especially the northern shore of the Black Sea.

        For completeness: The meaning of Ashkenaz in Hebrew changed to "German" in the middle ages (i.e. it moved from East to Central Europe) which explains why descendants of Yiddish speaking Jews are now known as Ashkenazi. i.e. "German Yews".

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery