[Mesorah] another grammar question

[Poppers, Michael]

Given the relationship between a qamatz and a patach, not to mention that both can imply a heih hay'diah and that either should be audibly distinguishable from a sh'va (something I wouldn't say about a segol, another vowel which can imply a heih hay'diah), I would correct a BQ who read "lawmeis" (or "lameis") instead of "l'meis" (and would not correct a BQ who, e.g., read "lawgeir" instead of "lageir").

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ, USA

-----Original Message-----
From: mesorah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org [mailto:mesorah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org] On Behalf Of Michael Hamm
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 3:09 PM
To: Micha Berger
Cc: mesorah at lists.aishdas.org
Subject: Re: [Mesorah] another grammar question

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:46:22AM -0500, Michael Hamm wrote:
> : Someone leining Ki Savo said (26:14) "v'lo nasati mimenu lames", with
> : an Ashkenazi kamatz (not a patach) under the lamed of "lames" instead
> : of the proper sh'va.
<snip>
> "Lameis" means "to the deceased", as opposed to the pasuq really talking
> about "to a deceased". No?

Does it?  With a kamatz?

Michael Hamm
_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org