[b-hebrew] Any meaning to the Dagesh?
Isaac Fried
if at math.bu.edu
Fri Feb 20 09:50:10 EST 2009
The purported Hebrew "geminate consonants" is, I suspect, a figment
of the imagination. Also, the "contrasting minimal pairs" of Jouon
and Muraoka are certainly not contrasting and not minimal.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Feb 20, 2009, at 6:21 AM, Kevin Riley wrote:
> The two questions are however related, as it was the gemination that
> prevented lenition in bgdkpt. If we assume that lenition is a post-
> exilic
> phenomenon, then had the Hebrews prior to the exile used the Tiberian
> notation, only geminate consonants would have been marked with
> dagesh. It
> is interesting that native speakers often do not feel the need to mark
> length in either vowels or consonants. When they do so, it is
> usually out
> of concern for those who are not native speakers. The Finns are
> one obvious
> exception to this.
>
> Kevin Riley
>
> -------Original Message-------
>
> From: Yitzhak Sapir
> Date: 20/02/2009 9:06:09 PM
>
> I am correcting myself here: I tried to use the same terms as
> Muraoka as I
> was
> Referring to his grammar. But the dagesh qal is dagesh lene, not
> plene.
> Second,
> Your question was about dagesh in general, not gemination. It still
> should
> be
> Treated as two separate questions, though.
>
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
>> What you're asking in linguistic terms is: is gemination phonemic?
> [...]
>> The question should be considered separately for the dagesh forte
>> (the
>> doubling/gemination) and dagesh plene (the one in bgdkpt, which is
>> what
>> you have in your example).
>
> Yitzhak Sapir
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
More information about the b-hebrew
mailing list