PRONUNCIATION OF SCRIPTURE PROPER NAMES

difficult to answer because the training and environment of even highly educated people differ so widely, and because what is prevalent in one circle is almost or altogether unknown in another.

Professor Cheyne suggests, as a guiding principle, the giving of some attention to the religious significance of proper names, particularly those which 'contain in some form the proper name of God in Hebrew.' With this laudable object, he, as a rule, shifts the accent in such names so as to bring their religious significance prominently before the reader. The practice, however, brings him into conflict with many undoubted cases of established usage. Professor Stevenson holds that the influences 'which must affect the treatment of Scripture names are — (1) The original pronunciation; (2) the characteristic tendencies of purely English speech; (3) the fixed customary pronunciation of certain words resembling others less common.' In applying the second of these principles — ^the characteristic tendencies of English speech — he appeals chiefly to analogy: —

' People naturally pronounce according to the analogy of other words which are familiar, and the practice supplies a rule of treatment. Doubtful or unfamiliar words should be pronounced in harmony with the general tendencies of the language, or in a way similar to other words which strikingly resemble them. Scripture names are borrowed from the foreign languages Greek and Hebrew. They are, therefore, to be compared specially with words of similar origin, such as the names of classical antiquity.' He admits, however, that ' conflict of analogies cannot be wholly avoided. If one is not in itself stronger than another, the most ' ' desirable " result in each case should be preferred. Ease of pronunciation is one test of desirability. The principle of pronunciation according to sense has also been used by the writer.'

It is needless to say that he carries out these principles with great care and consistency. The weak point of the position is that the analogies founded on by one scholar wiU not be equally familiar, or commend themselves to the same extent, to another; and it may well appear to many that Professor Stevenson in his list of proper names concedes too much to popular usage, and would in some cases attain a more desirable result by approximating more closely to the form of the original.

3. Points for consideration. — ^We shall now present for the consideration of the reader who desires to achieve as great a degree of correctness as the matter admits of, some of the more important points which he will have to decide for himself, assuming that when he has once adopted a rule he will foUow it as consistently as possible, or be able to give a reason for any deviation.

(1) Shall we adopt what may be called the Continental pronunciation of the vowels— a.= ah, e=eh, i=ee, u=oo? — In many instances we may be strongly tempted to do so; to one who knows Hebrew it is more natural, and the effect is finer — Mesopotamia is a grander word than Mesopotamia. But it is only in the less familiar words that this could be done. The first syllables of Canaan, Pharaoh, Balaam, must have the a as in fate or fair.

(2) Is the Hebrew J to be pronounced like j in judge, or like y? — It would probably be impossible to foUow the latter mode in the large number of names beginning with J, such as Jericho, Joash, &c., and it would be intolerable in the case of Jesus; but there are instances in which it would impart an added dignity — e.g. Jehovah-jireh is far finer if the j be sounded as y, and the i as ee. In the middle of words, especially in words containing the Divine name Jah, the matter has already been settled for us, as it in most cases appears as iah, Ahaziah, Isaiah, Shemaiah. The question here arises whether the i is to be treated as consonant or vowel, and if the latter, whether it should ever be accented. Professor Cheyne, in order to bring out more prominently the Divine name, would treat the iah=]'ah always as a separate word — Ahaz'iah, Isa'iah, Shema'iah. Except for this considera^-tion the rule would probably be, that where it follows a consonant the i is not only treated as a vowel but also accented — Jeremi'ah; when it follows a vowel it is assimilated with that vowel as in the two examples given above, which also illustrate the way in which one or other vowel may give place, Isaiah (Isar-ah), Shemaiah (Shemi-ah), though some woiild render the former also Isi'ah.

(3) The question often arises in the case of names of three or more syllables, especially when the last two are significant in the original, whether the accent should be placed on the penultimate or thrown farther back in accordance with general English practice. Professor Stevenson says: — 'The English stress accent in ancient foreign names is determined, with limitations, by the original length of the vowels, not by the original stress.' But in the case of words in familiar and frequently read passages of Scripture, the ' hmitations ' are extensive, and must be allowed to override considerations based on length of vowel. Where Cheyne prefers Abime'lech, Ahitho'phel, Jocheb'ed, Joha'nan, Stevenson gives Abim'elech, Ahith'ophel, Joch'ebed, Jo'hanan. On the other hand, Cheyne gives Am'raphel and A'holiab', where Stevenson accentuates Amra'phel and Aholi'ab. Nor is it an English trait to have too much regard for significant parts of words. We do not say philosoph'y, biolog'y, Deuteronom'y (though this is heard occasionally), but the stress is laid on the connecting syllable. So, if Abim'elech and the class of names ruled by it be allowed, a great deal might be said for Abin'adab, Abi'athar, and similar words being pronounced thus, instead of Abina'dab, Abia'thar, etc., notwithstanding the length of the penultimate in the original. Here, again, views will differ according to the ' educated usage ' to which we have access, and the deference we may be inclined to pay to the peculiarities of English speech. With reference to Jochebed and Johanan in the examples quoted above, it should be noted that Stevenson makes an exception to the rule of the penultimate