The other day I heard the idea that the ng pronunciation of Ayin might be the one the massoretes had in mind. I find this very interesting indeed - it would have the advantage of being easier to distinguish from Olef - after all a lack of distinction between the two happens not only among Ashkenazim, but also in the ancient world and among modern Oriental communities.
Still, without a documentation one would assume an Arabic-style Ayin, as in most communities who differentiate between Olef and Ayin.
If at the merger of Ayin and Ghayin, the latter prevailed, it would still not be nasal yet.
Another question is whether the assumed original sound is exactly like in the Spanish-Portuguese (plus Dutch Ashkenazi) and the Italki pronunciations (velar), in other words like an English ng in 'singer', or further to the back (pharyngeal)?
So, have you ever heard about this, or do you know sources or the like?
The other day I heard the idea that the ng pronunciation
of Ayin might be the one the massoretes had in mind.
My understanding has been that the massoretes merely tried to record
sounds in a consistent manner, in writing, so that (for example) one
could easily be sure which words have a kamatz and which have a
patach, or which have a esnachta and which have a sof pasuk.
I am troubled by RLPM's use of the phrase "had in mind". He seems to
suggest that the massoretes were attempting to change pronunciation
towards a particular direction. Am I mistaken? Did they try to change
the way the ayin was pronounced?
If I am indeed wrong on this, then I would love to see some sort of
very basic introduction to this subject. Preferably in English. "The
Mesorah for Dummies", perhaps. Anyone wanna write it?
The problem with "ng" is that it's nasal, not a stop.
As for whether the ayin is velar, uvular, or phrayngeal, the other geroniot
are uvular and further back. Quph is probably uvular (as per the teimanim),
but not a geronit. So, if uvular consonants are the gray area WRT geronit
classification, velar ones are certainly out.
The other day I heard the idea that the ng pronunciation of Ayin might be the one the massoretes had in mind.
My understanding has been that the massoretes merely tried to record sounds in a consistent manner, in writing, so that (for example) one could easily be sure which words have a kamatz and which have a patach, or which have a esnachta and which have a sof pasuk.
I am troubled by RLPM's use of the phrase "had in mind". He seems to suggest that the massoretes were attempting to change pronunciation towards a particular direction. Am I mistaken? Did they try to change the way the ayin was pronounced?
-- all-clear, all-clear --
What I meant was not that the massoretes wanted to change the pronunciation. I have no reason to doubt that they, as you wrote, developed or refined a system to note down exactly their knowledge of the tradition, in order for others to reproduce the sounds. When I wrote "had in mind" I meant the sound they knew as the correct one, which in theory could have been similar to Arabic Ayin, to Arabic Ghayin, or to English ng. I wasn't implying they had a tradition of, say, Arabic-style Ayin, but changed it to Ng or vice versa.