Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>]

  The question was good, the explanation so far are tentative. A possible one 
is that the dagesh compensated for an earlier "N"  which became assimilated 
with the "T".
   
    It is also interesting to note that the Masoretes preserved strong 
d'geshim where they heard them, and seemingly for no apparent reasons other 
than oral transmission. The term for such d'geshim is " For the Glory of the 
Reading"   (l'tif'eret haq'ri'ah). Examples:
   
                              Battim Elleh Lammah Hemmah Shammah
   
    No doubt, somebody or other explained the above.
   
     Uri
   
   

                
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Mail
 Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>From dwashbur AT nyx.net  Fri Mar 10 10:34:37 2006
Return-Path: <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from S1.cableone.net (s1.cableone.net [24.116.0.227])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB304C013
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:34:36 -0500 
(EST)
Received: from [192.168.0.105] (unverified [24.117.84.217]) 
        by S1.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S1) with ESMTP id 49332496 
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:35:10 -0700
From: Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:34:32 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.8
References: <d965698e0603091612k52a00fa1p AT mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <d965698e0603091612k52a00fa1p AT mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200603100834.32957.dwashbur AT nyx.net>
X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 1, First 181, in=163, out=0, spam=0
X-External-IP: 24.117.84.217
X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse AT cableone.net
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] shwa, shtayim and sharp taw
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:34:37 -0000

On Thursday 09 March 2006 17:12, Herman Meester wrote:
> I would like to ask the interested members' opinion on the origin of
> the word =D7=A9=D7=AA=D7=99=D7=9D shtayim.
> Remarkably, this word has a shwa with the shin, but a dagesh in the taw.
> A so-called shwa na` (mobile) is supposed not to be followed by a
> sharp begedkepet consonant sign: it should have a soft
> "veghedhkhefeth" variant, if the shwa we are dealing with had once
> been a vowel - i.e. if it really is a shwa na`.
>
> Of course, to the Masoretes there was only one shwa: representing the
> absence of a vowel.
> But for convenience's sake, I am here referring to the common paradigm
> of "two shwas". (Which makes sense to the historical grammar of
> Hebrew, not the grammar of the MT itself.)
> Apparently the shwa in the word shtayim is not a shwa na` then, but a
> shwa nach (quiescens). The original form of the word =D7=A9=D7=AA=D7=99=
=D7=9D shtayim in
> that case started with two consonants - apparently this was possible
> at least in the case of a shin.
> The standard Arabic equivalent of the word, (i)thn=C4=81n, resolves its
> initial 2 consonants, if needed, with a preceding vowel.
>
> Now I was wondering, what have the members heard of their teachers,
> when they first learned Hebrew, regarding the shwa-issue? I have the
> feeling that, often, certain absolute phonetic laws are proposed to
> students, which in practice are subject to so many exceptions, that it
> would have been better not to have mentioned these in the first place.
> Another aspect of this, see above, is that diachronic and synchronic
> grammar are often mixed up.

My first teacher gave us the basic two-type rule, then told us there was on=
e=20
exception, the number "two" in its various forms: shney, shtey, shnayim,=20
shtayim.  When we asked him why, he fell back on an answer that he used ver=
y=20
effectively on several occasions: "How do I know?  I wasn't there!"

=2D-=20
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
=46ame is fleeing, as good old Whatsisname used to say.