Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Inseparable Prepositions and that shewa

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Vadim Cherny <vadimcherny AT gmail.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Inseparable Prepositions and that shewa
  • Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:46:16 +0300



On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Vadim Cherny wrote:
Though not attested, there's no doubt about the absence of dagesh kal
in bitechem.
Binchem has no gemination; what except intonational difference in
chanting can explain its difference from michtav?
Speaking of gemination, no nun in gav, yet gabcha. What we see here is
kal rather than hazak. The Masoretes used kal to forcibly syllabify:
bi-.nchem, ga-.bcha.

"Binchem" is not attested at all. Vadim, you are inventing words to justify
your theories, which have no basis at all, and which directly contradict things
that the Masoretes themselves wrote. I am therefore asking you to please
quote a verse for every word you use. In any case, the word "$imkhem" is
attested and has the exact same syllabification as mikht@v. I have no idea
what word you mean by gabcha so again, please quote a verse for the
examples you bring up.

Yitzhak Sapir


---

The Masoretes, sorry, did not write anything on grammar. Saaida wrote centuries after them.
Michtav has dagesh while $imchem doesn't - would you suggest any conceivable difference between them which have led to different use of dagesh kal?

Vadim Cherny




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page