Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

1. You should get yourself the two very useful booklets

ד"ר שאול ברקלי, לוח הפעלים השלם
ד"ר שאול ברקלי, לוח השמות השלם

2. This is the common wisdom explanation: that the dagesh in the G of  
XOGU, 'celebrate', is to show that this G is one for two. In Na. 2:1  
we find XAGIY חָגִּי with a qamac under the X and still a dagesh  
in the G. In Ex. 12:14 it is TXAGUHU תְּחָגֻּהוּ also with  
a qamac. In Ps. 107:27 we find YAXOGU יָחוֹגּוּ in the sense  
of reel, written with a "full" xolam, yet still with a dagesh in the G.

In Gen. 8:1 we find VA-YA$OK-U וַיָּשֹׁכּוּ with a patax  
in the V, a dagesh in the Y, and another dagesh in the K.  Here too,  
the common wisdom explanation is that the dagesh in this K is to show  
that it is one for two.  I can not bring myself to believe that a dot  
was inserted into the bosom of the Hebrew letter K just to inform us  
that a second one is hiding under the first. For what?

3. Do you mean in SHORSHI, TABNITIY?

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On May 17, 2011, at 4:35 PM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. wrote:

> isaac,
>
> >>> But there are exceptions: there is a dagesh in the G of XOGU,  
> following a xolam.
>
> can you send me the reference? clearly if it comes from XGG then,  
> from my point of view,
> a dagesh on the G is required! if it comes from XWG then i cannot  
> explain it.
>
> >>> We see that a dagesh follows HA-, yet it is absent in HA-MDABR- 
> IYM הַמְדַבְּרִים of Ex.6:27. Why?
>
> maybe the second dagesh forte is the reason why the first dagesh  
> forte was removed.
> just for the argument, let's assume dagesh forte did signal  
> consonant gemination. then it would be difficult
> to maintain BOTH geminations in sequence for reasons of meter, in  
> HAMEDABRIM. try it!
>
> now, since the second dagesh is SHORSHI, the first dagesh is  
> sacrificed.
>
> voila...
>
> nir cohen