Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] two systems of dgeshim

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Pere Porta <pporta7 AT gmail.com>
  • To: Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>
  • Cc: B-Hebrew list <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] two systems of dgeshim
  • Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 07:40:24 +0200

I do not understand, Isaac, why you do not take into account the classical
distinction between the dagesh forte and the dagesh lene.
You say in your post of word סִתְּמוּם SITMWM (Gn 26:15) and you try to get
the reason for the dagesh into the T... without any reference to the Pi'el
form of this word...
The T has dagesh because this is a Pi'el form, not because there is a hirix
before it...
Compare this word with תִּפְשוּם TIP&WM (1K 20:18): its pattern is exactly
the same as that of SITMWM, the dagesh in the second root consonant
excepted... that being so not because of the hirix but because in 1K 20:18
we have a Qal form (Imperative: *seize them!*) while in Gn 26:15 we have a
Pi'el form (Past: *they stopped them up*).

Regards from

Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain)
2012/5/13 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>



--
Pere Porta




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page