Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>]

vayyishal Ari shte she`elot
>1) Deut. 22:3 ve-khen ta'aseh
>
>Mordechai Breuer and Michael Perlman record that Leningrad has
> munah revi'a as the accents, but in Westminster, Dotan/Adi and
> BHS (which as based on Leningrad) I see kadma azla.

My BHS has darga -- shofarholex (=munaH) in the first 've-xen ta`aseh
         then      shofar-holex -- zarqa                    in the
second 've-xen ta`ase
         then      shofar-holex -- grish/geresh       in the third
've-xen ta`ase

Dotan has the same for the first two, though different font for te`amim,
         But        shofar-holex (=munaH) -- revia` for the third.

When one needs to choose between BHS and Dotan, should we go Dotan?

. . . and opening the facsimile we find:

                       shofar-holex (=munaH) -- revia` for the third
'v-xen ta`aseh'.
score one for Dotan, Breuer and friends.


>2) Deut. 21:13 u-vakheta
>
>Dotan/Adi has a merkha on the bet, whereas Westminster and BHS have a meteg.

Yes, BHS has a meteg on the bet, followed by tvir

Dotan has maarix (=merxa) on bet, followed by tvir. So does the Breuer
tanax (RQuq)

This looks like it should go to BHS
. . . and opening the fascimile we find:
     ma`arix (merxa)!

score two for Dotan and friends

It should be noted that the Leningrad meteg and maarix are very close in 
shape,
the maarix is just microscopically longer than some meteg and hangs
slightly forward.

My conclusion: Dotan has correctly transcribed a scribal mistake in Leningrad.
The Feldheim tana"x simanim has corrected this and reads like BHS on this
word.

braxot
Randall

>If anyone has the Leningrad facs., please let me know which accents you see 
>in these instances.

>Thanks,
>Ari Kinsberg

-- 
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth AT gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life