[Mesorah] ham'chadesh, ham'vorach, ...

hayyimobadyah at aol.com hayyimobadyah at aol.com
Thu Jun 12 13:17:43 PDT 2008


What Gesenius says about mem after the article does also apply to lamedh or yodh after the article but *not* to that dagesh at start of word, which he calls conunctive dagesh and does indicate doubling. However, although Gesenius was a brilliant grammarian he has no standing in masora. 
For halwiyyim be sure sure to double check each ga'ya in a reputable text since tiqqunim often add them without solid masoretic evidence.  I can't speak for other traditions but the Baghdadhi minhag is to read halwiyyim with shewa nah not na'.  
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: "Richard Wolpoe" <rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com>

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:26:09 
To:"Michael Hamm" <msh210 at math.wustl.edu>
Cc:mesorah at aishdas.org
Subject: Re: [Mesorah] ham'chadesh, ham'vorach, ...


On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Michael Hamm <msh210 at math.wustl.edu <mailto:msh210 at math.wustl.edu> > wrote:
 R' Hayyim wrote, in part:

 Gesenius sees the mem after the article as having a "virtual dagesh", and so it acts grammatically as if it had a dagesh (the shewa is na') but is not pronounced as a doubled consonant. (He applies this to the other exceptins as well and theorizes that in these cases the actual pronunciation had lost the doubling and so the Masoretes did not record dagesh.).
 
 Is something like that true also when a letter (typically a lamed for some reason, in m ylimited experience) takes a dagesh at the start of a word? It's not pronounced doubled, but is (for purposes I cannot fathom) grammatically a dagesh?
 


 
 Michael Hamm
 AM, Math, Wash. U. St. Louis
 msh210 at math.wustl.edu <mailto:msh210 at math.wustl.edu>                 Fine print:
 http://www.math.wustl.edu/~msh210/ <http://www.math.wustl.edu/%7Emsh210/>  ... legal.html


And what about halevi'im in this weeks' Sidra?
Sheva na [afaik] but NO Dagesh in the lamed!
 The Gaya separates the hei hayedi'ah in such a way that it is  NOT  hal-vi'im but  ha'levi'im
but there is still no dagesh.

Why? 


 



-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
 RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/ <http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/> _______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org



More information about the Mesorah mailing list