[Mesorah] another grammar question

[Ben Kandel]

  The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (Google it), probably the most 
accurate girsa of Targumim available, has "l'mis" (the listserve won't 
let me attach a screenshot of it, but you can look it up--go to the 
"Targum Studies Module").

In any case, a lamed before a word can often have a kametz without it 
necessarily taking the place of the missing definite article "ha", 
especially when it precedes the accented syllable.  Examples: /bein 
mayim lo-moyim /(Bereishit 1:6); /lo-netzach/ (many times, e.g. 
Yirmiyahu 3:5); /lo-zeh/ (every time it appears, for example Shmuel Alef 
21:12, 25:21), etc.  This also often appears when the lamed is before an 
infinitive, for example in /lo-ses, lo-ledes, /etc. So I think it was 
probably not a mistake that changed the meaning of the word.

Kol tuv

Ben Kandel

On 8/29/2010 6:44 AM, Zev Sero wrote:
> On 29/08/2010 6:03 AM, Danny Levy wrote:
>> Indeed there appear to be different girsaos of Onkelos for l'meis in
>> this posuk.
>
> If you compare several chumashim (of different editions, obviously, not
> just offsets of each other) you will find several different girsaos of
> Unkelus.  Most people think there's one definitive girsa, because
> they've never done the exercise.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100829/dc9ae46d/attachment-0005.htm>