Acronyms and the Bible

Is 'Tanakh' a Good Name for the Hebrew Bible in English?

By Philologos

Published May 07, 2012, issue of May 11, 2012.
  • Print
  • Share Share

In response to my column of two weeks ago in which I objected to the use by Jews of the term “Old Testament,” several of you have expressed the opinion that the best alternative to it is “Hebrew Bible.” Miriam Segall of Minneapolis, on the other hand, wants to get even more Jewish that that. “The Hebrew Bible has a perfectly good name,” she writes. “It’s the Tanakh. I find this the simplest solution to the problem.”

wiki commons

The Tanakh (“Tanach” in some spellings, with the “‘ch” pronounced as in “Bach”) is how the Bible is most commonly referred to in modern Hebrew. The word is an acronym, composed of taf, the initial letter of torah; Nun, that of nevi’im, and kaf, that of k’tuvim. Torah — literally, “Teaching” — is a word that denotes the Five Books of Moses, although it frequently has the wider sense of Jewish religious teaching and study in general. The nevi’im or “Prophets” are divided into nevi’im rishonim, “First Prophets,” comprising the historical narratives of the Bible from Joshua through Second Kings, and nevi’im aḥaronim, “Latter Prophets,” made up of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the 13 “minor prophets” from Hosea through Malachi. K’tuvim, “Writings,” has all the rest. Its initial “k”-sound becomes the “kh” of “Tanakh” because that’s what always happens to a kaf at the end of a Hebrew word or syllable.

Acronyms — saying “Nay-tow” for NATO, for example, as opposed to saying “En-Ay-Tee-O” — exist in many languages, and English has its share of them. (Think of “radar,” from “radio detecting and ranging,” or “laser,” from “light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation.”) Yet Hebrew has many more of them than other languages, something that is partly due to its being written without most vowels, which its readers are accustomed to supplying on their own. In a Hebrew text, acronyms are generally indicated by a gershayim, a sign between the last two letters that resembles quotation marks, so that tanakh, for example, is written תנ״ך. Even if a Hebrew reader were unfamiliar with such a word, he would automatically vocalize it, reading it aloud as “tanakh” or “tenekh,” not as “taf-nun-kaf.”

Indeed, Hebrew may well have the oldest acronyms in the world. Some go back nearly 2,000 years, as in the passage in the Passover Haggadah in which the Ten Plagues are listed as detsakh (from dam, blood; tsfarde’a, frogs, and kinim, lice), adash (arov, pest; dever, plague, and sh’ḥin, boils) and be’aḥav (barad, hail; arbeh, locusts; ḥoshekh, darkness, and b’khorot, firstborn males). Moreover, new Hebrew acronyms are constantly being coined, often as spontaneous slang words. Just the other day, to go from the sacred to the vulgar, I came across the unfamiliar (to me) verb l’kaste’aḥ, spelled לכסת״ח. It took me only a moment to figure out that it was an acronym for “to cover one’s behind,” from kisuy, cover, and taḥat, behind.

But let’s return to the sacred: Tanakh, though an old acronym, is not one of Hebrew’s oldest, being early medieval in origin. Nor was it ever used much in traditional rabbinic literature, in which other words for the Bible were far more common. Although its history is not well documented, it seems to have been first popularized by the spread in the Jewish world of one-volume, family-owned Hebrew Bibles, which did not take place before modern times.

Handwritten medieval Hebrew Bibles were rarely squeezed between a single binding; rather, they were divided into separate manuscripts, with several books of the Bible in each, so that the inclusive caption Torah-Nevi’im-K’tuvim did not appear on their title page. It did appear on the title page of the first complete printed Hebrew Bible, published in Soncino, Italy, in 1488. Yet the bulky Soncino Bible sold fewer than 300 copies (and no wonder — it cost the equivalent of a year’s earnings for most people!), and subsequent single-volume Hebrew Bibles were hardly affordable for the average Jew, either. It was only with such 19th-century inventions as the type-composing machine that small, mass-produced, one-volume Bibles of the kind we are familiar with today became widely available. Tanakhim could now be found in Jewish homes everywhere, and as a commonly used word among Jews, tanakh referred specifically to such a book. At first, Jews spoke not of the tanakh in general, but of the tanakh that they or their neighbor owned. Only gradually did tanakh come to be applied to the more abstract idea of the Hebrew Bible in any form.

Is “Tanakh” a desirable way for Jews to refer to the Hebrew Bible in English? I think not — or at least not with non-Jews or with Jews who are not Jewishly literate. Besides being a word that the average American would have difficulty with and would be likely to turn into “Tanak,” it’s simply not English and should not be imposed, for reasons of Jewish pride, on an English-speaking public. Jews can rightfully expect non-Jews to respect their feelings about the Bible; non-Jews can rightfully expect Jews to use language that is understood and pronounceable by all. “Hebrew Bible” meets both these requirements, and I agree that it’s what we should go with.

Questions for Philologos can be sent to philologos@forward.com


The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • Could Spider-Man be Jewish? Andrew Garfield thinks so.
  • Most tasteless video ever? A new video shows Jesus Christ dying at Auschwitz.
  • "It’s the smell that hits me first — musty, almost sweet, emanating from the green felt that cradles each piece of silver cutlery in its own place." Only one week left to submit! Tell us the story of your family's Jewish heirloom.
  • Mazel tov to Chelsea Clinton and Marc Mezvinsky!
  • If it's true, it's pretty terrifying news.
  • “My mom went to cook at the White House and all I got was this tiny piece of leftover raspberry ganache."
  • Planning on catching "Fading Gigolo" this weekend? Read our review.
  • A new initiative will spend $300 million a year towards strengthening Israel's relationship with the Diaspora. http://jd.fo/q3Iaj Is this money spent wisely?
  • Lusia Horowitz left pre-state Israel to fight fascism in Spain — and wound up being captured by the Nazis and sent to die at Auschwitz. Share her remarkable story — told in her letters.
  • Vered Guttman doesn't usually get nervous about cooking for 20 people, even for Passover. But last night was a bit different. She was cooking for the Obamas at the White House Seder.
  • A grumpy Jewish grandfather is wary of his granddaughter's celebrating Easter with the in-laws. But the Seesaw says it might just make her appreciate Judaism more. What do you think?
  • “Twist and Shout.” “Under the Boardwalk.” “Brown-Eyed Girl.” What do these great songs have in common? A forgotten Jewish songwriter. We tracked him down.
  • What can we learn from tragedies like the rampage in suburban Kansas City? For one thing, we must keep our eyes on the real threats that we as Jews face.
  • When is a legume not necessarily a legume? Philologos has the answer.
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.