Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Pere Porta <pporta7 AT gmail.com>]

Sebastien,

I'll try to make an answer ready for you.
But in the meanwhile, remark: it is NOT "qamats-hatuph" but "qamats qatan".

The "qamats-hatuph" is only used with *guturals*. Look for instance at Jdg
5:6, 8th word.
Another sample at Ps 9:7.

Heartly,

Pere Porta

2011/2/28 Sébastien Louis <sebalou AT hotmail.com>

> Pere,
>
> million thanks for your explanations, very clear in this particular case.
> As I'm still a beginner in biblical Hebrew, may I ask if there is a general
> rule saying when we should pronounce qamats and when we should pronounce
> qamats-hatuph? I thought that in every closed, unaccented syllabe, it was
> qamats-hatuph. But I see that there are many exceptions and cases where it
> is not the case...
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Sébastien Louis
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:27:51 +0100
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Qames hatuph - syllable and sheva
> From: pporta7 AT gmail.com
> To: sebalou AT hotmail.com
> CC: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
>
> Sébastien,
>
> you bring here two different cases.
>
> 1. You refer to the word we find in Dt 6:5. There are other similar cases
> in the Bible (look for instance at Ps 55:23; at 1Sa 9:10 or at Gn 40:19).
>
> Remark:
> -All nouns consisting of three root letters, the first one having shewa and
> the second one having qamats (all....with *five* exceptions) ------> take
> qamats under the second consonant when they take the masculine suffix for
> you (male).
> --Most nouns consisting of three root letters, the first one having tsere
> (long e) and the second one having qamats (the word you mention is one of
> these: look at Dt 28:28 for the basic or absolute) behave similarly if they
> do not come from roots ayin-waw nor have a guttural for their first root
> consonant.
>
> 2. The Hoph'al.
>
> The first syllable in the Hoph'al is ALWAYS read with vowel 'o' and in the
> unvowellized writing a waw is inserted.
>
> So, הָקְטַל
>
> is ALWAYS read or pronounced as "hoqtal" and it is always written as הוקטל
> in the writing without vowels (namely the usual Israeli script...)
>
> You have other cases in Jr 6:6, Joel 1:9 and in Dn 9:1
>
> Is this clear enough for your purposes?
>
>
> Heartly
>
> Pere Porta
> (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
>
> 2011/2/28 Sébastien Louis <sebalou AT hotmail.com>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
>
>
> I’ve got one question
> about the qames and qames-hatuph (linked also with the sheva and the
> syllabes). If the qames is
> in a closed, unaccented syllable, it is pronounced qames-hatuph. Take these
> 2 words:
>  לְבָבְךָ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> הָקְטַל
>
>
>
>
> My question is: why do we pronounce "le-va-ve-kha" (and not "le-vov-kha")
> on the
> one hand; and on the other hand, “hoq-tal”? Both cases
> seem to me identical, i.e. a qames in a closed, unaccented syllable. So why
> 2 different rules?
>
>
>
>
> In
>  other words, why is the qames in the first case a
> qames and not a qames-hatuph since it is followed by a sheva, so in a
> closed,
> unaccented syllable (I presume the accent falls on the last
> syllable)? Or, to say it again differently, why is the syllable "va" in
> "le-va-ve-kah" open and not closed, since followed by a sheva?
>
>
>
>
>
> Many thanks in advance if you can help.
>
>
> Sébastien
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pere Porta
>
>


-- 
Pere Porta