Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Well, I think it is so The dagesh, which I believe to be a pre NIKUD  
reading hinter, is not needed in plene writing. Indeed, SIYM is  
routinely written in full, and consequently with no dagesh, as the  
יְשִׂימָם YSIYMAM of Deut. 7:15. But in 2Ki 13:7 it is  
וַיְשִׂמֵם WAYSIMEM, and still with no dagesh. This means, I  
think, that at the time the dgeshim were introduced into the biblical  
text the word was written plene with a Y, which was lost later on.

A similar fate befell the letter W of UGAB of Ps. 150:4, and hence  
the lack of a dagesh in the letter B following a qubuc.

I think that there were two systems of dgeshim that got mixed  
together in our present text. In one system, a dot was placed after a  
qubuc, a patax or a xiriq even in a letter not followed by a vowel,  
for example, סִתְּמוּם SITMUM of Gen. 26:15 and  
וַיְסַתְּמוּם WAYSATMUM of Gen. 26:18. In the other  
system, a dagesh is not placed in a letter marked now by a schwa, for  
instance, וַאֲמֻשְׁךָ WA-AMU$KA of Gen. 27:21.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On May 10, 2012, at 11:33 AM, Isaac Fried wrote:

> Why there is no dot in the first letter M of וַיְשִׂמֵם
> WAYSIMEM I don't know.