[b-hebrew] Miqdash

George Athas George.Athas at moore.edu.au
Sun Feb 5 04:57:14 EST 2012


Well, in a qoph it would be dagesh forte, right? Therefore, the shewa is vocal. Unless this is something like the "guh-lory of reading", I don't buy it. Either way, it's weird.

Maybe the original scribe with the bad aim also had a mean left hook, so no one was game to correct him?


GEORGE ATHAS
Director of Postgraduate Studies,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia


From: Yigal Levin <Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il<mailto:Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il>>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 11:03:50 +0200
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Miqdash

And then never corrected by any later copyist or printer?

Many of the Jewish commentators, such as Ibn-Ezra, claim that the unique
feature is "letif'eret haqeri'ah" - "for the glory of reading". In other
words, since this is poetry and the niqud and cantilation marks are meant as
an aid to aural recitation of the text, so that the reader emphasizes that
the word "Miqdash" is not connected to the following "Adonai" ("the temple,
Lord", and not "the temple of the Lord").

What d'yall think?


Yigal Levin

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org>
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George Athas
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 10:45 AM
To: B-Hebrew
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Miqdash

Seems like a classic case of bad aim. A scribe burning the midnight oil?


GEORGE ATHAS
Director of Postgraduate Studies,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia


From: Yigal Levin <Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il<mailto:Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il><mailto:Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il>>
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 19:15:08 +0200
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org><mailto:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>>
Subject: [b-hebrew] Miqdash

Dear all,


In all of the places in which the word "Miqdash" (temple, sanctuary)
appears, there is a dagesh on the dalet. Only in Ex. 15:17, the dagesh is on
the qoph. This is consistent in all of the editions that I have checked,
including BHS. Anyone have any idea why?



Yigal Levin



Dr. Yigal Levin

The Israel and Golda Koschitzky

Department of Jewish History

Bar-Ilan University

Ramat Gan. 52900

ISRAEL

<mailto:leviny1 at mail.biu.ac.il>
Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il<mailto:Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il><mailto:Yigal.Levin at biu.ac.il>


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org><mailto:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list