Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Jason,

I realize that this thread is exhausted and on the wane, but since  
you are misrepresenting my position I will reiterate it here.
I support the notion that the dagesh system is of great antiquity,  
representing the intermediate stage between the bare text and the  
fully punctuated text. The NAQDANIM of the 7th century had already  
books with the dagesh system in them but they left it there (out of  
veneration for tradition?) even though this dagesh became superfluous  
with the introduction of their full NIKUD.
Consider Ex 9:25, which I bring here bare

את כל-עשב השדה הכה הברד ואת כל עץ השדה  
שבר

How was the public reader of two thousand years ago to remember that  
it is $IBER and not $ABAR? For this purpose a mnemonic tiny dot was  
placed in the hollow of the B to remind him of the XIRIQ, or the  
missing yod. Such a dot was placed also following a QUBUC, and it  
became the inner dot of the $URUQ.
The dagesh is indeed absent in QITOR,'steam', which has a yod, or  
GDULAH, 'greatness', which has $URUQ (some books have, erroneously, I  
think, a dagesh in GDULAH of Esther 6:3).
I have no good explanation for the dagesh following PATAX.
There are exceptions, as usual, for instance in the tree name LIBNEH  
of Genesis 30:37, or the personal name GID(ON of Judges 6:13.

Isaac Fried, Boston University