Fwd: Immanuel (accentuation)

Raymond de Hoop rdehoop at keyaccess.nl
Sun Mar 11 10:26:28 EST 2001

Dear all,

I was asked off list, what I meant with my remark concerning the
accentuation of  <Hebr> (mnw)l <endHebr>, because

"I do not see how the Massoretic accents make (iM.ANW and )"L one word.
Could you please explain that again, or cut and paste what you said before?
The accenting is the same at the end of verses 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, or 18,
isn't it?"

I have to admit that after several mailings, my argument has become rather
enigmatic with regard to the accentuation (and non-accentuation) of these
two elements of <Hebr> (mnw)l <endHebr>. Below you will find the argument
I'm referring to (mailed on 03.09.2001 11:24hrs.). To be clear it disputes
the accentuation as presented in the editions of BHS/BHK/Snaith on the basis
of what was found in Codex Leningradensis. I hope this clears up some of the


Isaiah 7:14 provides a theophoric name, which is generally written as
one name. 
Moreover, D.W. Thomas etc. may be wrong too. It occurs that the editors --
in case he took the Masoretic accentuation of the text in consideration --
erred with regard to the first element (MNW . In BHS, BHK and Snaith this
element is marked with the conjunctive accent Merka (curved to the left),
while CL reads in Isaiah 7:14 (and probably also in 8:8) a Metheg (or Ga`ya;
curved to the right). Because this sign is not an accent, it does not mark
independent words, but indicates only additional musical or phonetic motifs,
it is clear that CL did read one word.

I have to admit here that I based my observation solely on CL and that other
MSS might provide a different interpretation. Yet there is no reason to read
two words here from a morphological, grammatical or syntactical point of

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list