The uncertainity of the proper translation/transliteration of our heavenly Fathers sir name is due to the condition of the manuscripts from which it is taken.
For the most part, those scholars who have had the privledge of acutally handling the oldest known manuscripts agree that the lettering YHWH is correct and thereby assert Gods sir name to be pernounced YAHWAH, but as it hase been identified by others, the Hebrew letter that is mistakenly given as a "W" has been improperly transliterated due to damage to this Hebrew letter in the aged manuscripts.
At first glance, the Hebrew letter does appear to be that which represents the "W" in the English language, but with farther examination one can detect a slight imprint and a partial ink mark in the page that gives evidence that the Hebrew letter is in fact a "V" and not a "W" as purposed.
"V" (Vav) and "W" (Waw) are the same letter. They are both represented by the logogram that symbolizes the fishhook. There can't be any imprint or ink mark that turns one in to the other. They are already identical.
But here's a fun fact... as the ancient Hebrew language evolved, the logograms (pictures) that originally represented the sounds were stylized into something more like letters. When the Essenes wrote the Dead Sea scrolls, they used a script of Hebrew that was modern at the time. HOWEVER, when they wrote the proper name of God, they abandoned their modern script, and wrote The Name in the older logograms. See here:
The proper English transliteration then should be YHVH, and when the proper vowels are included the proper pronouncation of Gods sir name is YAHAVEH.
There are no vowels in Hebrew. Modern Hebrew has diacritical marks which approximate vowels, but these did not become part of the language until hundreds of years after Christ. The entire Old Testament was written without them.
Everything else contributed to His person are no more than identifiers or attributes such as Elohim.
El is the first part of Gods person which in English terms is the identifier that gives us His person as GOD or the supreme being, but the last part of the title "ohim" has nothing to do with His person and is in fact actually identifying something other than GOD.
The oldest book in the Bible is Job. It uses ELWH as the name of God. Depending on who you ask, EL is either a shortened version of ELWH, or else ELWH is a combination of EL and YHWH.
Either way, ELHM is the plural form of ELWH. Waw is dropped due to elision and Mim is suffixed to make it plural in the same way that we stick an "S" on the end of English words.
In ancient Hebrew custom, a man is identified through his father and thereby being expressed by others as [example] Johnohim or son of John.
The concept is right but the grammar is wrong. Typically "Y" or "YT" is suffixed for this purpose, as in IsraelI