Skip to Content.
Please activate JavaScript in your web browser
List archive
Re: [b-hebrew] Why not patah?
Chronological
Thread
<
Chronological
>
<
Thread
>
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?
,
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
.