You’ve recently noted that the correct transliteration of the Hizb… group is the noun-noun construct "Hizballah".
Prof Cole spells it "Hizbullah". I wrote Cole to ask why he uses a ‘u’ instead of an ‘a’ as you do, and here’s his reply:
"Hizbu’llah consists of Hizb plus the definite nominative marker "u" plus the second element of the construct state, Allah, the beginning hamza of which is elided by the preceding "u"."
Of course, he tosses an apostrophe in there as well. Are both transliterations correct, technically speaking?
I had not looked at it from this close a grammatical perspective, but Juan’s point of the nominative marker "u" and the elision of the following Hamza-Fatha are well taken. I don’t quite see what the apostrophe stands for but I am willing to learn.