[Mesorah] She'ata / Sha'ata

[R. Rich Wolpoe]

SBA:
«I truly know nothing about these matters but just in case itis relevant
the posuk Vayeira 18 25
Chalila lecha me'asos kadovor hazeh.....chalila lach hashofet kol haaretz...
 
lecha and lach in the same pasuk - both referring to Hashem»

In Tanach
It's a function of trop and pause. 

L'cha is the form in the middle of a phrase which becomes
Loch, the corresponding  pausal form, at the end of a phrase. 

The question on the floor is, do the rules of Tanach apply to davening, too? And if so, how much? And it does apply, does it make sense to change forms of words so as to comply.

For example, shelo assani oved presupposes that the pausal form oved is at the end of the b'rachah.  Otherwise, it would be the non-pausal eved.

Well, if this conforms to a valid rule, then gefen does not
So gefen at the end fails "pausalbility". Now we need to decide, is that "wrong"?

Here are some possibilities
1.  It's kinda random so why bother with consistency?
2. It's an error, fix it
3. It's a valid exception for midrashic or Kabbalistic purposes even though it defies grammar.
4. We're not sure what it is so therefore -
A. Make it conform
Or
B. Leave it alone.

--------------------

Many Baalei Dikduk, even before the Haskalah, decided that davening ought to conform more closely to Tanach "Norms". Or given that Davening sometimes conforms, why not make it smoother and more consistent?

Others disagree and say Manuscripts [Mss.] Are a better source

The grammarians then counter that errors crept into the Mss.

Still Others follow Minhag Avos.
Shalom and Regards, RRW