Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Herman Meester" <crazymulgogi AT gmail.com>]

L.S.,
Excuse me for misrepresenting the usefulness of BHS.
I should have referred to a good grammar of B-Hebrew, or stay out of it.
I was actually surprised too, to find there's so little in BHS.
Have to admit I don't use BHS if I don't have to, and I remembered
having seen something in it I hadn't seen ;).

Herman Meester,
Rotterdam



2006/4/5, Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>:
> On 05/04/2006 12:19, Albert & Julia Haig wrote:
> > ...
> >> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/3438052199. But there is very little
> >>
> > here about accents, only a card with their names.
> >
> > Not true. In my copy of BHS, the word is clearly marked with a silluq 
> > under the letter resh, and hence is pausal, as other posters have noted.
> >
> >
> Yes, the text is fully marked with accents, as in most printed Hebrew
> Bibles. But there is very little explanation of the accents. And that
> was what Herman seemed to be promising to Steve when he wrote:
> > This "accentology" (my word) is quite a league of its own. If you'd like 
> > to know more about it, maybe you have the BHS? The introduction will 
> > mention something, such as their names to begin with.
> In fact there is almost nothing about accents in the Foreword to BHS,
> and the only list of names is on the separate card.
>
> > Having a copy of BHS is absolutely essential for OT Hebrew exegesis. ...
>
> Why do you consider BHS rather than any other good edition essential? Is
> it the apparatus, full of conjectural emendations? Is it the Masora? Is
> it the small textual differences from editions based on the Rabbinic
> Bible? In what other ways is BHS different from other editions?
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>