Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Re: Lev. 25:34

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
  • To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Re: Lev. 25:34
  • Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 22:02:01 +0200

Thanks Joeseph, Shai, Giuseppe,

I'm getting the picture.

Yigal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph I. Lauer" <josephlauer AT hotmail.com>
To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Cc: "Giuseppe Regalzi" <regalzi AT tiscalinet.it>; "Yigal Levin"
<leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: Lev. 25:34


> Unfortunately I am relying solely on memory as I type, not having
> Breuer's Mossad HaRav Kook Tanakh before me. So, please read with care.
> I believe it has been stated (perhaps also in Breuer's essay in that
> Tanakh) that the difference in the use of the Shewa and the Hataph-Patah
is
> attributable to the particular notation system from which the text/codex
> derives and that the Hataph-Patah in one system was pronounced as the
Shewa
> in the other system (and as is generally done now). If I remember
> correctly, one of the "changes" that Breuer made in his Tanakh was to
change
> Hataph-Patah to Shewa because that is in accordance with the notation
system
> now in use, the other system having been "discarded".
> I also believe that one can see the remains of the old system in some
> Siddurim that have a Hataph-Patah under the Resh in Borekhu in the morning
> and evening prayers (and before the prayer for the Torah reading), while
> other Siddurim have the Shewa. In both cases, I have been informed, the
> sound should be that of the Shewa Na.
> Joseph I. Lauer
> Brooklyn, New York
>
> Yigal Levin wrote:
>
> > In most primts that I've seen, the second letter (Sin) of the first word
> > of Lev. 25:34, "usedeh" is vocalized with a Hataph-Patah; in Brauer and
> > BHS it has a Shewa. Any guesses about the source of the unusual
spelling?
>
> Giuseppe Regalzi wrote:
>
> > GKC (§ 10g, pp. 52-53) puts it this way:
> >
> > "Hateph-Pathah is found instead of simple Shewa (especially Shewa
mobile),
> > chiefly … (b) under initial sibilants after וּ copulative, e.g. וּזֲהַב
Gn
> > 2:12; cf. Jer 48:20; וּסֲחַר Is 45:14; וּשֲׂדֵה Lv 25:34; וּשֲׁקָה Gn
> > 27:26; וּשֲׁמָע Nu 23:18, Is 37:17, Dn 9:18, cf. Ju 5:12, 1 K 14:21, 2 K
> > 9:17, Jb 14:1, Ec 9:7—to emphasize the vocal character of the Shewa."
> >
> > See also Joüon-Muraoka, § 8a n. 4, p. 51.
>
>






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page