Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Pere Casanellas <pere.casanellas AT btlink.net>]

I have not at hand now facsimiles of the L and Aleppo manuscripts, but I am 
nearly sure that the editors of the BHS just copied a distinction that 
already is in the manuscript.

I have checked the facsimiles of the following manuscripts and editions 
that I have at hand and all of them differentiate clearly betwen holam + 
vav mater lectionis and vav consonant + holam:

        Gottweig (Austria), Stiftsbibliothek, ms. 10 and 11 (883), XIV or 
XV century (Pentateuch + Prophtets, square Ashkenazic script)

        Second Rabbinic Bible (Venice 1524-1525), by Jacob ben Hayyim.

        Biblia Polyglotta Complutensis (Alcalá de Henares, 1514-1517)

--
Pere Casanellas
E-mail: pere.casanellas AT btlink.net
        pcasanel AT pie.xtec.es
http://www.pere.casanellas.com/bible
Barcelona
CATALONIA (Spain)

==============================================================


At 04:02 25/07/2003 -0700, Peter Kirk wrote:
> I received the following from a contact in Israel:
>
> > Vav Holam may convey two meanings, either just a vowel or a consonant Vav
> > with the vowel Holam.
> > Some typographers differentiate these two meaning, many do not. I don't now
> > if there is any Masoretic basis for the distinction or if it is late, and
> > whether it is consistently used in those texts that do make the distinction.
>
> I don't know either. Can someone answer this? There is a typographical 
> distinction in the printed BHS (and an encoding distinction in the 
> Michigan-Claremont-Westminster text. But is there actually a distinction 
> in original MSS like L and Aleppo?
>
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter.r.kirk AT ntlworld.com
> http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/