Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Laurent Pinchard <ougaritique AT yahoo.fr>]

dear Isaac,

would you know why in Gen 1,18 we have a hatuf patah under the lamed 
(LHBDYL), which I don't understand: this semi vowel never appears under lamed 
as a preposition. Note that I have this from the BHS edition. Interestingly 
Leviticus 10,10 also mentions the same lamed with hatuf patah on the same 
word. Elsewhere any word starting with W(shuruk)LH-- would have as 
anticipated a patah or a shewa. Is this hatuf patah under the lamed a 
mistake? if not what is the rationale ?

laurent


     
>From yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com  Mon Mar  2 06:49:19 2009
Return-Path: <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 813E44C014; Mon,  2 Mar 2009 06:49:19 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled
        version=3.2.3
Received: from mail-fx0-f180.google.com (mail-fx0-f180.google.com
        [209.85.220.180])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB6F4C013
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon,  2 Mar 2009 06:49:18 -0500 
(EST)
Received: by fxm28 with SMTP id 28so2716940fxm.30
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:49:17 -0800 
(PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.102.228.10 with SMTP id a10mr2903012muh.26.1235994557569; Mon,
        02 Mar 2009 03:49:17 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <789711.92143.qm AT web27402.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
References: <789711.92143.qm AT web27402.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:49:17 +0000
Message-ID: <e6ea6c000903020349n1e7b3eecn66c446eb2938d911 AT mail.gmail.com>
From: Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] hatuf patah under the lamed (LHBDYL) in Gen 1,
        18 and  Lev 10, 10
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:49:19 -0000

On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Laurent Pinchard wrote:
> dear Isaac,
>
> would you know why in Gen 1,18 we have a hatuf patah under the lamed 
> (LHBDYL), which I don't understand:
> this semi vowel never appears under lamed as a preposition. Note that I 
> have this from the BHS edition.
> Interestingly Leviticus 10,10 also mentions the same lamed with hatuf patah 
> on the same word. Elsewhere
> any word starting with W(shuruk)LH-- would have as anticipated a patah or a 
> shewa. Is this hatuf patah
> under the lamed a mistake? if not what is the rationale ?

The rationale is that you won't mistake it for a silent schewa.

Without the hataf patah, the word would be pronounced: [uul-hav-'diil].
With the hataf patah, the word is pronounced: [uu-lahav-'diil]

Note that u: (the shuruq at the beginning of the word) is normally
short.  In this case, however, it takes
secondary stress so it is long (and probably divided in reading as [uu]).

This probably has to do not only with the "wlh" but with the stress of
the word.

Yitzhak Sapir