Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Jason Hare" <jason AT hareplay.com>]

> And so for the Masoretic
> pronunciation
> perhaps we have some kind of perpetual Qere, with the
> pronunciation as
> if there is one lengthened lamed; so we would have unchanged
> Ketiv HLLW
> YH but Qere HAL.W. YAH.

I thought that HLL was a piel form, so both lameds were to be pronounced. Am
I just off? Thus, the dagesh in the first lamed represents the dagesh of the
piel binyan, and the second lamed is the third radical. Have I ever seen
HLWYH instead of HLLWYH? I don't think so. I don't recall seeing it in any
of the Massoretic notations, and I never had read about it being a perpetual
q'rei until this message. Can I get a reference?

Thanks,
Jason Hare