b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: Pere Porta <pporta7 AT gmail.com>
- To: Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
- Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 06:35:32 +0100
>
> Dear list,
>
We all know that the vowel of the first syllable in the Qal Perfect, third
person plural, of regular verbs (shelemim) is qamats.
And so,
--)FM:RW, they said (Ps 64:6)
--$FLXW, they sent (Jr 14:3)
and so on.
My question is: why a qamats and not a patah?
Reasons like "tradition", "custom"... are not welcome.
I'm trying to know and understand why a qamats and not a patah, mainly if we
consider that this first syllable is a closed syllable.
Would there be any trouble if patah was used here in the place of qamats?
Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
--
Pere Porta
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?,
Pere Porta, 01/18/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?,
Yigal Levin, 01/18/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?, Pere Porta, 01/18/2011
-
Message not available
- Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?, Yigal Levin, 01/18/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah? Why the ambiguity?, Christopher Kimball, 01/18/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?,
Yigal Levin, 01/18/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?, Isaac Fried, 01/18/2011
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
[b-hebrew] Why not patah?,
Uri Hurwitz, 01/18/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?, Isaac Fried, 01/18/2011
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.