Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Jason,

Seriously, where did you get it that "kubuts is ALWAYS
short"?

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Feb 28, 2009, at 3:06 PM, Jason Hare wrote:

> Isaac,
>
> The dagesh must be there because it is a short vowel (kubuts is ALWAYS
> short) found in an unaccented syllable. A short vowel in an unaccented
> syllable must always be in a CLOSED syllable. The dagesh closes the
> syllable. It is necessary with the pointing. You will not find an
> unaccented syllable with patach, segol, kubuts (because they are
> short) unless segol or patach precedes a syllable with a half-vowel
> (hatef-segol or hatef-patach, respectively). It's a basic part of the
> system, Isaac, and your refusal to accept it only highlights more of
> the weakness in your theory, which cannot account for the dagesh
> except to say that 'the dagesh seems to appear after kubuts and
> hirek,' which is just ridiculous and completely unsystematic. It has
> absolutely ZERO explanatory power.
>
> Jason Hare
> Rehovot, Israel
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
> > The dagesh in (ARUMIM, 'naked', of Gen 2:25 is possibly to alert the
> > public reader not to read the word as (AROMIM or (EROMIM or (EYROMIM
> > from the singular (EYROM of Gen 3:10. In Gen 3:7 it back to (EYRUMIM
> > ( עֵירֻמִּם ) in QTIB XASER and a proper dagesh in the M.
> >
> > Isaac Fried, Boston University