Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

1. A dagesh (which in opinion preceded the NIQUD) is expected after a  
PATAX, a XIRIQ and a QUBUC, in a letter (not X, R, etc.) not marked  
by a schwa. Hence the dagesh in the second M of MIMENIY and the N of  
We-HINEH.

2. In Gen. 30:6, the dagesh in the second N of DANANIY follows a  
PATAX, and the second N is "moved".

3. The dagesh in XANENIY of Ps. 51:3 is for another reason. The  
dagesh in the first N of XANANIY is expected as it follows a PATAX.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Dec 14, 2010, at 12:51 AM, Pere Porta wrote:

> Dear list,
>
> at gathering patterns that consist of TWO root letters + suffix - 
> NY, I got
> the result of 19 items that conform the entire list.
>
> Now, 17 of them have NY, so simply, while there are two that have a  
> dagesh
> in letter nun:
>
> 1. Preposition MIN + NY gives MIMENY (Jdg 7:17), whith dagesh in  
> both the
> medial mem and the nun.
>
> 2. Verbs ayin-waw having nun for their last root consonant (such as  
> LDYN, to
> judge, Ecc 6:10) take a dagesh in the nun of the suffix as well:  
> DNNY, he
> judged me (Gn 30:6).
>
> At a first glance one would think that, quite simply, a dagesh is  
> put in the
> N of the suffix whenever the basic word ends in nun by itself, as  
> it is the
> case for 1. and 2.
>
> But...... facts say this does not run this way, witnesses the first  
> word in
> Ps 51:3 and a quite similar word in Gn 33:11.
>
> Would there be a good reason for this apparently ununderstable  
> behaviour of
> lettern N of the suffix -NY as regards taking or not taking dagesh?
>
> --
> Pere Porta
> (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew