Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>]

On 06/01/2007 19:57, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
> ...
> Compare Ibn Ezra's Tsaxut which states:
> And the noted scholar (Hayyuj) said that the Tiberians would read the
> mobile schewa if a yod follows, with the vowel of hiriq as in יֶחְזְיָהוּ
> (yɛxziyɔhu) יִרְמְיָהוּ  (yirmiyɔhu) ...

I think you mean that they would read yɛxiziyɔhu, yirimiyɔhu. Well, the 
Greek and Latin version of the latter name, and the English "Jeremiah", 
tend to confirm that there should be a vowel between the resh and the mem.

> ... and the schewa which is followed by a big
> qamats (ie, qamats) as in בְּרָכָה שְׁמָרִים as a hataf patax
> (=barɔkɔ, $amɔrim)
> that is, a schewa with a patax, and if after the mobile schewa there is one
> of the letters alef,het,het,ayin which are the guttural letters, the schewa is
> always as the vowel which follows such as (2 Kings 10:10) דְעוּ אפוא the
> dalet is to be read as a shuruq ("du(u") and in the word דְּעִי as if
> it is with
> a hiriq ("di(i") and in דְּעֶה as if it is with a small patax (ie, segol).
>
>   
Doesn't the last part of this imply that the qamats gadol in words like 
בְּרָכָה שְׁמָרִים (your barɔkɔ, $amɔrim) is closer to a hataf patax than to a 
hataf qamats, therefore that it is more of an "a" than an "o" and 
different in quality from qamats qatan?


--
Peter Kirk
E-mail:  peter AT qaya.org
Blog:    http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/