Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>]

Thanks, Raymond.

I also saw Breuer's article. Fascinating what can be done with so little
evidence!

Yigal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Raymond de Hoop" <rdehoop AT keyaccess.nl>
To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Ta`am `Elyon of the Decalogue


> Dear Joseph, Yigal and others,
>
> The Ta`am `Elyon of Exodus 20, which you find in some recent editions
> and which have Revia at the last word of verse 2 (`avadim) is not the
> way Codex Leningradensis marks the Ta`am `Elyon. In the Leningradensis
> and in the Damascus Pentateuch you will find Silluq with Soph Passuq
> with the last word of verse 2 (`avadim) and indeed a Revia at the end
> of verse 3 (panay), while the Ta`am Tachton has Atnach at the end of
> verse 2 (`avadim) and at the end of verse 3 Silluq with Soph Passuq
> (panay). I checked this in the facsimile editions, but you also may
> find this in A. Dotan, Biblia Hebraica Leningradensia, Peabody (MA)
> 2001, pp. 109 (T.Tachton), 1227 (T.`Elyon).
>
> The Revia on `avadim at the end of verse 2 (according to the Ta`am
> `Elyon), which can be found in many Jewish Bible editions, is in fact a
>   _third_ system of accentuation. Because when you would check your BHS,
> you won't find Revia at the end of verse 2! This third system is a
> rather late development, which is not found in manuscripts, but which
> can be found in Miqra'ot Gedolot, Venice 1526 (my source: M. Breuer,
> "Division by Verses and Commandments", in: B.Z. Segal, G. Levi (eds.),
> _The Ten Commandments in History and Tradition_, Jerusalem 1990, pp.
> 291-330). In fact Revia at the end of verse 2, marking `avadim, is
> impossible according to the system of Te`amim, because the "Revia-unit"
> is preceded by a "Zaqeph Qaton-unit" or with a "Atnach-unit",  which
> are both impossible. The other way round (Revia-unit preceding
> Zaqeph-unit) could be possible, while the "Atnach-unit" belongs to the
> Ta`am Tachton (otherwise it would preceed a "Sgolta-unit"  [at the
> beginning of verse 5: to`ovdem]), and a second "Atnach-unit" (end verse
> 5 [l'son'oy]), which is impossible too.
> This third system, with Revia at the end of verse 2, represents the
> tradition of reading the first and second commandment as one, heard
> directly from the mouth of G-d, and it's traces are only found at the
> end of the Middle Ages, at the beginning of printed Bible editions. For
> that reason this tradition seems to be the youngest.
>
> The other two, Ta`am `Elyon and Ta`am Tahton, as found in the
> Leningradensis and other mss represent two possibilities.
> Ta`am Elyon with taking verse 2 as the first davar  and verse 3-6 as
> the second davar, etc.
> Ta`am Tachton takes verse 2-3 together as one commandment and verse 4-6
> as one commandment.
>
> To make it somewhat more complicated ....
> You may note that the text is also divided by means of setumot and
> petuchot. Verse 2-6 is considered as one "paragraph", which would
> result in nine commandments; but the final commandment is divided again
> by a setumah where we find Atnach (re`eka [not shown in BHS, but it is
> there in the Leningrad Codex; cf. Dotan]). This division also results
> in ten commandments, be it artificial; probably it is related to the
> third tradition which has Revia at the end of verse 2?
>
> Kol tuv,
> Raymond
>
> ——————————————————————————
> Dr Raymond de Hoop
> Lecturer of Classical Hebrew
> Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies
> University of Groningen
> Oude Boteringestraat 38
> 9712 GK Groningen
> +31 503 635 574
> R.de.Hoop AT theol.rug.nl
>
> Home:
> Boeiersingel 11
> 9745 CA Groningen
> 0031 505 530 115
> rdehoop AT keyaccess.nl
>
>
>
>
> On 15 feb 2004 at 2:23 heeft Joseph I. Lauer wrote the following:
>
> >     As I noted, page 415 of the ArtScroll Chumash (Stone Edition) has
> > the
> > Ta'am 'Elyon for Exodus 20:2-14.  The First Commandment (v. 2) and the
> > Second Commandment (vv. 3-6) are combined (that is, there are no
> > colons or
> > other contemporary punctuation marks dividing the verses).  As in other
> > printings of the Ta'am 'Elyon, the last word of the First Commandment,
> > v. 2
> > ('Avadim), has a Revi'i.  In the Second Commandment, the last word of
> > v. 3
> > (Panai with a Patach at the end of the word, not a Kamatz as in the
> > Ta'am
> > Tahton) has a Revi'i, as does the last word of v. 4 (LaAretz).  The
> > last
> > word of v. 5 (L'son'oi [I'm trying to indicate a Kamatz at the end of
> > the
> > word!]) is marked with an Esnahta.  The Second Commandment ends (v. 6)
> > in
> > both versions with a Sof Pasuk.
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>
>