The Letter Resh (ר)
The pronunciation of the letter Resh (ר) is known to be like the letter R, but the letter Resh (ר) itself varies from place to place just like the letter R. In each place, the Jews pronounce it however the R is pronounced in that place. There is not necessarily any disagreement between Sephardim and Ashkenazim in its pronunciation. Rather, the Ashkenazim disagree among themselves. It’s clear that it’s impossible to pronounce the Resh (ר) the way it’s pronounced in central Europe, as a soft Gimal (ג), because that would make it the same as another letter, and we don’t pronounce two letters the same way. Furthermore, the Resh (ר) has its origin in the teeth with the help of the tongue, not from the back of the pallet or the throat.
We can also bring proof, again, from the words of R. Dunash ben Tamim (10th century Tunisia) who listed the letters that Arabic has and we lack. He did not count the Ra (ر) among them. This implies that our Resh (ר) is the same as the Arabic Ra (ر). Also, the geonim wrote in Arabic with Hebrew letters, and they used our Resh (ר) to correspond to the Arabic Ra (ر). This implies that they have the same pronunciation. Furthermore, most Ashkenazim would pronounce the Resh (ר) not like the soft Gimal (ג), and to this day, the Jews of Russia, Romania, Hungary are the same.
Therefore, we find the author of Ohel Moshe (chief rabbi of Lviv in 1765) writing about those who pronounce the Resh (ר) as if it were a Heth (ח) (that is to say, like a soft Kaf כ, which is similar to a soft Gimal ג, which is the French and German Resh ר). He referred to them as “those of cut tongue”. This implies that in his time, not many Jews were pronouncing the Resh (ר) as similar to the Kaf (כ) or soft Gimal (ג). This is why he referred to them as a small minority that pervert the pronunciation of the Resh (ר), and that they are “those of cut tongue.” Had there been entire communities doing so, he would not have referred to them this way.
Note from the translator: This chapter was a bit disappointing for me. The author and I had a long-standing debate regarding the letter Resh. The issue was that the Book of Yesirah (of uncertain origin, but probably composed between the 2nd and 7th centuries AD) lists the letter Resh among the double letters (בגדכפר”ת). We know about the other double letters; they are defined by the absence or presence of a Light Dagesh (Dagesh Qal), which makes them hard or soft. The Resh is different; in all of scripture, it only has a Degesh a handful of times. One of them is in The Song of Songs (5:2), which Yemenite Jews read in synagogue every Friday night. “שׁרּאשׁי נמלא־טל.” Yemenites emphasize that Resh, lengthening it so that it’s trilled much as the double R is trilled in Spanish. To the best of my knowledge, no other Jewish community has any tradition on how to pronounce this hard Resh differently than any other Resh. Also, the fact that the Resh is counted, in the Book of Yesirah among the letters of the teeth (זשׁסר”ץ). The author insisted that the Dagesh form of the Resh would have been from the back of the pallet, as central Europeans pronounce the R, and as a few Babylonians pronounce it. In his opinion, this double Resh was not based on whether or not there was a Dagesh; rather it would have been according to a long-lost set of rules. Based on what he wrote here, it looks like he eventually agreed with me, but he should have addressed the issue of the double Resh.
