Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

Jason,

I am sorry, but your "vocalic lengthening" is in my opinion a figment  
of your imagination.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Feb 24, 2009, at 8:37 AM, Jason Hare wrote:

> Isaac,
>
> I think, in terms of Hebrew study, you really must exist in a
> different sphere from the rest of us. I'm just lost as to (1) how you
> at all didn't understand what I wrote and (2) responded with what is
> below. You're saying, I guess, that the lengthening of patach to
> kamats or segol (in some situations) is just purely random and has not
> EXPLANATION? Is that what I'm supposed to take from this? You reject
> the stand explanation that the dagesh represents consonant
> assimilation and that the rejection of the assimilation results in
> vocalic lengthening? I really don't know where you're coming from in
> terms of your explanations of Hebrew morphology. You're so outside the
> box that the box doesn't even make sense to you, and your theories
> don't make sense to me.
>
> Jason Hare
> Rehovot, Israel
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
> > Jason,
> >
> > As I recall, the standard explanation given in the Hebrew grammar  
> > books for
> > the dagesh after HA- is that it is put there to mark a lost  
> > consonant,
> > possibly the L of Arabic HAL. They raise a similar argument about  
> > the dagesh
> > after MI- which they claim is to indicate the lost N of MIN. Thus,  
> > they
> > admit that this dagesh is a mere diacritical marking that can be  
> > safely
> > dropped with no loss of meaning.
> >
> > The distinction between the various HA- is contextual and is  
> > independent of
> > the dagesh.
> >
> > Isaac Fried, Boston University
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew