Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Any meaning to the Dagesh?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>
  • To: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
  • Cc: "b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Any meaning to the Dagesh?
  • Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:02:58 -0500

John,

I am not sure if this is what you are looking for, but consider XUMCAH, (חֻמְצָה), 'acid', punctuated qubuc, schwa, qamac, but with no dagesh in the M, in spite of the KTIB XASER. Yet the pual form XUMCAH, (חֻמְּצָה), 'she was made sour' is also punctuated qubuc, schwa, qamac, but now with a dagesh in the M as per the rule.
In any event, these are only formal games.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Feb 25, 2009, at 2:33 PM, Brak wrote:

David Kummerow wrote:
Hi John,

Not sure what you mean by "base morpheme".

By "base morpheme" I mean the main part of the word - not the prefix (es)
or suffix(es).
This should have been clear by my use of the example below of:

<H:A/$OM"R> vs <HA/$.OM"R>:
<$OM"R> = Qal Participle Masculine Singular
<$.OM"R> = Qal Participle Masculine Singular

So lets just focus on the dagesh on the base.
So in the above example the dagesh has no effect on the meaning of the base.
Its Qal Participle Masculine Singular with or without the dagesh.

Are there any examples where the dagesh (and it alone) will change the
meaning?



B"H
John Steven
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page