Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 06/09/2005 13:35, Yigal Levin wrote:

> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: <davedonnelly1 AT juno.com>
> >    
> >
> > > Kelton Graham asked:
> > >      
> > >
> > > Hey is there a rule that only gutterals can have composite shewa?
> > >      
> > >
> > > Then check the second occurrence of YHWH in Judges 16:28,
> > > and you will find that there is a composite shewa [e.g. Hatef-Segol]
> > > under the yod,
> > > which is not a guttural letter.
> > >
> > > Apparently rules were meant to be broken.
> > >
> > > Dave Donnelly
> > >
> > >      
>
> This is because this particular instance of YHWH, like most others that
> follow the word Adonai, is meant to be vocalized "Elohim" (traditionally
> translated "Lord God"). The hataph-segol under the yod represents the
> hataph-segol under the aleph in elohim, which is guttural.
>
>  
But in that case why are only three examples of YHWH to be pronounced 
Elohim pointed in this way?


> Yes, rules are meant to be broken. This is simply not a good example.
>
>  
For what it's worth, in the Westminster Leningrad Codex text I found:

9 cases of hataf segol (4 excluding Aramaic)
166 cases of hataf patah (160 excluding Aramaic)
235 cases of hataf qamats (177 excluding Aramaic)

following non-guttural consonants in the Hebrew Bible. But I understand 
that different Hebrew texts differ significantly on this.

Of the 9 cases of hataf segol, three are the divine name (Gen 15:2,8, 
Jdg 16:28), five are in Aramaic, and only one, $E/$.:EZFPA73T/:NIY in 
Song of Songs 1:6, is an actual Hebrew word.

So, it seems that, at least in the Leningrad text, Dave's rule is fairly 
commonly broken by hataf patah and hataf qamats, but not by hataf segol.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005