בַּמַּאי (bama'i) — film/theater director; בִּמּוּי (bimui) — directing
Etymology
The word בָּמָה appears dozens of times in the Bible, meaning a high place or an altar on a hilltop. Independently, Talmudic sages borrowed the Greek word bema (a raised platform from which speakers or actors address an audience) and rendered it בִּימָה — distinct from the biblical במה in both voweling and origin. This Talmudic בימה appears in tractate Sukka (51b): "a wooden bima in the center, upon which the synagogue reader stands." In the modern Hebrew revival, the similarity between the two words — biblical בָּמָה and Talmudic בִּימָה — would become the center of a heated debate.
On October 27, 1927, the poet Avraham Shlonsky published a set of new coinages in the literary journal Ketuvim. Among them: "בִּמּוּי — the art of staging (on the bama), and: בַּמַּאי — one who stages." Within months, the young linguist Yitzhak Avneri wrote a letter to Ha-Aretz objecting: the root of במה is ב.ו.מ, he argued, so the correct verbal and nominal forms should derive from that root — yielding ביים and ביום, not בימוי. He allowed that the noun במאי could stand, since it was built on a pattern like שמאי (from שיים).
The debate resurfaced in August 1931 when the literary journal Ma'aznaim published a long essay by poet Yaakov Fichman under the title "בִּיּוּם" — pointedly using the rival form — with a footnote citing Bialik's oral authority for the ב.ו.מ root. Linguist Avraham Avroni defended Shlonsky's בימוי the following week, arguing that (a) the root evidence for ב.ו.מ is not conclusive, (b) even if it were, a word borrowed from Greek has no Hebrew root and may be inflected freely, and (c) precedent in Hebrew allows patach-stems from ל"ה roots. Avneri responded with a list of dictionaries and grammarians supporting ב.ו.מ, plus his "decisive proof" — a Syriac word bumo meaning "high place," which he claimed showed the word was Semitic, not Greek, and thus subject to Hebrew root rules. This last argument was generally considered unconvincing.
In 1940, the Va'ad HaLashon (Language Committee) ruled in Avneri's favor: ביום is correct, not בימוי. The ruling was widely ignored. בימוי remained in common use — though interestingly, the related verbal forms followed Avneri's root: Israelis say ביים (from ב.ו.מ), not the form that would follow from בימוי.
Key Quotes
"בִּמוּי - סִגוּל לַבָּמָה (בַמֵה, לְבַמוֹת) מזה: בַּמַאי - המסגל לבמה וכו׳ בדרך זו" — אברהם שלונסקי, כתובים, 27.10.1927
"שלש שנות-שמוש - אינן חזקה, כשמדובר הוא במלה עברית" — יצחק אבינרי, מאזנים, 1931
Timeline
- Biblical period: בָּמָה (high place, hilltop altar) appears throughout the Bible
- ~200 CE: בִּימָה borrowed from Greek bema in Talmudic Hebrew (Sukka 51b)
- October 27, 1927: Shlonsky proposes במאי and בימוי in Ketuvim
- Early 1928: Yitzhak Avneri objects in Ha-Aretz, arguing for ביום from root ב.ו.מ
- August 1931: Fichman publishes essay titled "ביום" in Ma'aznaim; linguistic debate resumes
- August–September 1931: Avroni and Avneri debate the root in Ma'aznaim
- 1940: Va'ad HaLashon rules for ביום; ruling largely ignored in practice
- Present: במאי universally accepted; בימוי in common use despite ruling; verbal forms (ביים, מבויים) follow root ב.ו.מ
Related Words
- בָּמָה — high place, stage (biblical Hebrew)
- בִּימָה — raised platform (Talmudic, from Greek bema)
- ביים — to direct (a film or play); follows root ב.ו.מ per Avneri/Academy ruling