Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

The XATAP PATAX may be just an emblematic indication that it is a  
schwa superseded by a PATAX. In this sense )ARUXAH  
( אֲרוּחָה ), 'meal', XALU$AH ( חֲלוּשָה ),  
'weakness', (AZUBAH ( עֲזוּבָה ), 'neglect', etc. are of MI 
$KQAL P(ULAH to which belong BTULAH ( בְּתוּלָה ), 'virgin', Y 
$UAH ( יְשוּעָה ), 'salvation', RPU)AH ( רְפוּאָה ),  
'medicine', etc..

Isaac Fried, Boston University


On Mar 2, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Uri Hurwitz wrote:

>   Your question is valid: the H(.)aT(.)aFim  (Plural of Hataf) were
> designed by the Masoretes to indicate semi-vowles which occur
> when the guttural letters were supposed to be silent,  that is, be
> pointed with a Sh'wa Nah(.). The reason for this is strictly phonetic:
>  they had sharp ears the Masoretes.
>
>   However they were also human, and were not consistent . Look
>  this up in any grammar.
>
>   In addition, mistakes occurred, as they occurred in the consonantal
> text. Such mistakes were explained away from antiquity to our very
> days in this list.
>
>  Finally, in the "Letteris" edition of the HB the Lamed in the  
> verses you
>  mentioned, is pointed with a Sh'wa as is proper, since this letter is
>  not a guttoral.
>
>    Uri  Hurwitz                                   Great Neck, NY
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew