[b-hebrew] Again on hireq/sere
pporta7 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 15 01:43:05 EDT 2011
what do you mean by "the dagesh is not a part of the NIQUD"?
I brought here some months ago the difference between
1. YFMIYM, days (Gn 4:3)
2. YAM.IYM, seas (Ps 8:9)
Why the dagesh does not belong to the niqud?
1. DFMIYM, bloods (Ex 4:25) (no dagesh) and
2. BFT.IYM, houses (Ex 1:21) (dagesh).
We have SWSIYM, horses (2Sa 15:1) (no dagesh) versus DWB.IYM, bears (2K
And there are many more like these...
How do you explain this if the dagesh is not a part of the niqud?
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
2011/4/15 Isaac Fried <if at math.bu.edu>
> A hirek is followed by a dagesh. The dagesh ("forte") is, in my opinion, no
> more than an ancient cue for the hireq, as in IWER, 'blind'. In other words,
> the dagesh is not a part of the NIQUD.
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
> On Apr 14, 2011, at 12:40 AM, Pere Porta wrote:
> Are there in Hebrew nouns, adjectives,
> adverbs... having ONLY a hireq in their first syllable and a sere in their
> second syllable (no dagesh, no shewa, no patah furtivum... at all!)?
More information about the b-hebrew