VadimCherny at mail.ru
Mon Mar 13 12:32:20 EST 2006
> >I would like to ask the interested members' opinion on the origin of
> >the word ???? shtayim.
> >Remarkably, this word has a shwa with the shin, but a dagesh in the taw.
> >A so-called shwa na` (mobile) is supposed not to be followed by a
> >sharp begedkepet consonant sign:
That is merely imprecise mnemonic rule.
Shtaim was originally used in smihuth, thus accent shift and consequential
reduction to shtei, normalized as shtaim. As for the dagesh, it indicates
the original form of piel or haial. Haial seems more plausible for me.
In other words, shtaim is a haial noun (or piel verb) commonly used in
> But once you come to the realization that a shwa represents the lack
> of a vowel --- no more, no less --- everything because eaiser and more
What vowel is lacked in nizcar? Interconsonantal schwa represents not a
vowel but consonantal vocalization, important in chanting to break the
clusters (ne-z'-car). Indeed, I argue that all Hebrew words originate from
CV, thus zacer - nzacer - nezcar, but that loss of the vowel took place long
before the Masoretes added interconsonantal schwa, which represents not a
vowel, but vocalization.
More information about the b-hebrew