I am almost absolutely certain that I read the answer to this in the archives once. What are the names of these things?
Jot and tittle. As in, he remembered (or put in, or whatever) every jot and tittle. Admittedly, not much used in modern life.
If I recall correctly (and that is getting harder every day) “Jots and Tittles” are the two smallest letters in Hebrew, or the most minor diacritical marks, or something like that. The names may have been co-opted for the parts of the latin letters.
Dr. Fidelius, Charlatan
Associate Curator Anomalous Paleontology, Miskatonic University
“You cannot reason a man out of a position that he did not reach through reason.”
DrFidelius:
I’m pretty familiar with Hebrew, and I can’t say I’ve ever heard those terms connected with that language. Possibly you’re confusing it with the Schwa.
Chaim Mattis Keller
ckeller@schicktech.com
“Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be
the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks.”
– Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
::sigh::
When all else fails, use the dictionary. I was, as usual, wrong. “Jot” comes from iota, the smallest letter in Greek. “Tittle” is a diacritical mark, from Latin.
So what did that rabbi with the big following really say? You know, that thing that was translated into English as “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 5:18 for the KJV impaired)
It seems to me that “yod” is a hebrew letter (“yud” in modern Hebrew) and is derived from an earlier Phonecian letter of the same name and phonetic value (/j/ or /i/ ot /I/). The Greek iota is derived from the Phonecian source (due to the use of Phonecian consonants in the previously syllabic Greek alphabet) and that the Latin “i” derives from partially Greek sources.
So, it’s reasonable enough to suggest the name “jot” shares an origin with Hebrew.
On the other hand, I’ve never heard of anyone who had used a word to designate the dot on the i. In linguistics and typography, a letter X with a dot above it is usually call “X upper dot” in my experience, but I doubt there’s any standard.
“Tittle” is a new one on me - I wouldn’t have belived it if I hadn’t looked up the KJV myself. I’d have to question any Latin origin for a word like that. The Vulgate has “iota unum aut unus” for “one jot or one tittle” - suggesting “tittle” is probably an English bastardisation of the French “trait” (used in the French Bible of Louis Segond for the same word.) Lacking an OED on hand, I’ll stop there.
(This comment brought to you with the help of ARTFL at http://estragon.uchicago.edu/Bibles/)
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: “O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.” And God granted it.
- Voltaire
“Jot,” and “tittle” are definitely not accepted Hebrew terms. The vowel symbols weren’t in use in the so-called “Intertestamental” times, and the smallest letter of Hebrew is called a yudh. I suppose a very bad transliteration could make it come out “jot.”
Since Matthew wrote in Greek what someone told him Yeshua said in Aramaic, anything is possible. I think that the Greek letter iota is some kind of bastard child of the yudh, but I’m on slippery grounds here. The Revised Standard Version of Matthew, which I had to buy once for college, says “not an iota, not a dot, will pass away…”
–Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny
And my version says:
“not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of the pen”
This is the New International Version(Zondervan Publishing House). Good version - lots of footnotes with alternate meanings.
Mastery is not perfection but a journey, and the true master must be willing to try and fail and try again
On a semi-related note, I remember watching a television show on PBS a /long/ time ago that had some sort of ‘chant’: Palabra jot, palabra jot. (Phonetic spelling, of course). Is this related to the jot of which you speak? What’s a palabra?
lovelee
I forget the exact name of the show, lovelee, but it was one of those mid-afternoon educational programs they’d put on during the summer. This one in particular focused on composition skills. Had a claymation cricket working for a newspaper/TV news program or something. The final segment of the program was called “The Club” and featured compositions sent in by viewers (kids ages 8-12, IIRC). The password was “palabra jot” and didn’t really mean anything.
Y’know, to the average person it might seem scary that someone would actually tune in to PBS (WENH Durham NH, in my case) to watch two or three hours’ worth of 15-minute educational programs, but some of them were real hoots, especially the natural and NH history films from the mid to late 70s. I loved the stuff!
Cave Diem! Carpe Canem!
So, not being a scholar of Christian theology (I’m barely competent with my own :)), there’s something I’ve always wondered about the “jot and tittle” quote. Given that Jesus was a Jew, and I assume he must have been talking about Jewish law, why don’t Christians keep kosher, keep the Sabbath, etc. I know there were arguments in the early church about whether or not followers of Jesus needed to convert to Judaism before becoming Christians. The ultimate decision to drop the (admittedly difficult) requirements of Jewish law and practice had obvious advantage in recruiting, but how is the quote from Matthew ultimately reconciled with that decision. More particularly, even if Jewish law wasn’t necessary for Gentile Christians, why weren’t Jews that (forcibly or voluntarily) became Christians in later centuries required by the Church to continue following halacha.
Rick
“Palabra” is Spanish for “word.”
>>Given that Jesus was a Jew, and I assume he must have been talking about Jewish law, why don’t Christians keep kosher, keep the Sabbath, etc. I know there were arguments in the early church about whether or not followers of Jesus needed to convert to Judaism before becoming Christians.<<
James said yes they should. Paul said no, they didn’t have to. As a result, Paul won many more gentile converst than James, and therefore came to be an authority figure. And his word is Christian law to this day.
>>The ultimate decision to drop the (admittedly difficult) requirements of Jewish law and practice had obvious advantage in recruiting, but how is the quote from Matthew ultimately reconciled with that decision.<<
I would love to know this too.
>>More particularly, even if Jewish law wasn’t necessary for Gentile Christians, why weren’t Jews that (forcibly or voluntarily) became Christians in later centuries required by the Church to continue following halacha.<<
I don’t remember all the details, but in Rosemary Ruether’s (did I spell that right?) book, Faith and Fratricide, she traces the dispute over Christians and halachot, and shows that at some point in Christian history, it became not just unnecessary, but heretical to do mitzvot according to halachot. Jews who converted were expected to drop all their Jewish practices and customs so as not to commit this heresy, and possibly lead gentile Christians to commit it as well.
–Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny
I had a discussion with a fundamentalist on this issue once. The key point for him was that “till all be fulfilled” part. He claims that the execution and aftermath somehow “fulfilled” the requirements of the “Old Law” and rendered it moot. I am still wondering how Paul got to be the authoritative voice of the early Church, overruling the opinions of those men who had actually heard Yeshua’s ministry.
Dr. Fidelius, Charlatan
Associate Curator Anomalous Paleontology, Miskatonic University
“You cannot reason a man out of a position that he did not reach through reason.”
“Jot” translates, and is definitely derived from, “iota”.
“Iota” is definitely derived from “yudh”, the letter iota is definitely derived from yudh, and the letter i is definitely derived from iota.
Yudh, iota, and i are all the smallest letters in their respective alphabets.
“tittle” translates Greek “keraia”, which may or not be related to Hebrew “keraayim”, “legs”, but which definitely means a stroke in a Hebrew letter.
John W. Kennedy
“Compact is becoming contract; man only earns and pays.”
– Charles Williams
In Spanish, “tittle” is “tilde” wich comes from the latin word *titulàre[/i) which relates to “the stroke of a pen”.
Tilde is the name for the “cross” on the “t”, or the one on the spanish letter ñ, or for any written mark used to differenciate a letter, or the accentuation (´) of it.
Now, iota was pronounced “jota” in old spanish, and even now we use this word to denote a VERY small thing, as in: “No entiendo ni jota” (I understand not an iota), which happens to me a lot… 
Men will cease to commit atrocities only when they cease to believe absurdities.
-Voltaire
Oooooooops! Sorry for all those italics. My fault. Still learning.
La regué.
John W. Kennedy:
Specifically, keraía (in Greek) derived from kéras, one of the horns of an altar. It meant a very small point or mark (much as pin point means a small object or mark), and came to be used of diacritical marks in writing. Tittle is an almost perfect translation of that meaning–a small mark used as a diacritical mark in writing, although the word is now so rare as to make the reference pretty obscure.
Tom~
And no doubt from the Hebrew “keren” for “horn.”
–Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny