[Mesorah] Hallel

[Mandel, Seth]

1) the Massoretic notes do not say the word is unique (l' for "lesa") if the word appears with the same vocalization and spelling but with different trop or stress.
2) Okhla v'Okhla is part of the Massorah, but not written in the margins. It DOES note pairs with different stress, but does not go beyond pairs, triplets, or quadruplets.
Thus, as R Breuer noted, the hatzlocha pair is listed in Okhla
V'Okhla, but the hoshi'a would not be.
Since Okhla v'Okhla is part of the Massorah and known to all the Ba'alei Massorah, sometimes its comments are brought in the Massorah and sometimes not. If they are, they usually appear verbatim.
3) I am flattered by R Micha's comments, but disclaim any beneficial influence. Either a person has interest in things or he does not. If he does not, you can still teach him some things, such as improving his pronunciation, but he will not understand the Torah involved.

And now back to the original question: as others have already noted, including my superior R DB, there is now no longer any question about the words according to the original Massorah: both mill'ra and a dagesh in the nun of the following word. Not only because that us the way it is in the Aleppo codex, but because it is that way in the other old codices, such as the Leningrad.
However, the situation was ripe for misunderstanding and "corrections" by grammarians: A) in all other places and normally with similar grammatical forms, such as quma, the stress is mill'eil (unless something else is going on). These two words here being mill'ra is definitely put of the ordinary.  B) the first nun would normally get a dagesh only if the previous word is mill'eil, such as "shakhna nna nafshi" and dozens of other cases. The dagesh in the nun following here is definitely out of the ordinary.
Such a situation, with two unusual features, is linguistically unstable. One if the most powerful forces in linguistic change, for all languages in the world, is analogy. It was predictable that people would change these in the days before printing, even without the Wise Grammarians, like the Wise Men in Bartholomew's stories, stroking their beards and declaring that this or the other form
Is correct.
And so, even by the time of the first printed T'NaKh, there were different versions, and even the Minkhat Shai records different opinions and cannot decide conclusively.

Rabbi Seth Mandel
Sent from my iPhone

On May 2, 2014, at 12:30 PM, "Michael Poppers" <michaelpoppers at gmail.com<mailto:michaelpoppers at gmail.com>> wrote:

RDBannett:
> Hoshi'a appears many times, all except this one are mil'eil. The absence of a mesorah on the exception is not a permit to change it. <
Yes, the absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence, but shouldn't this instance being the only mil'ra be all the more reason to have a Masoretic "leis" comment upon it, given what the absence of such a comment implies (as noted by MS)?  Thanks.

A gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom
and all the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ, USA


On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 10:27 AM, D&E-H Bannett <dbnet at zahav.net.il<mailto:dbnet at zahav.net.il>> wrote:
Late last night, I saved some time by referring to a page in R' M. Breuer's book.  As I don't expect that many have the book next to their computers, I'll fill in what I omitted last night.

The Minchat Shai "corrected" the Tanakh because he notes that "if they were both mil'ra' the Radak and other ba'alei Mesorah would have mentioned the mil'ra' status of hoshi'a just as they do mention the mil'ra' status of hatzlicha. The absence of a mesoretic comment on hoshi'ah made him change it to mil'eil.

Breuer explains why there is a mesorah on hatzlicha.  The word occurs twice in the Tanakh, once mil'eil and once mil'ra'.  It appears in Okhla v'Okhla as one of the twelve pairs one mil'eil one mil'ra'.

Hoshi'a appears many times, all except this one are mil'eil. The absence of a mesorah on the exception is not a permit to change it.  The Keter and all the accurate manuscripts as well as the much copied Ben Hayyim  Mikraot Gedolot 1625 Venetzia have both words mil'ra' and both nuns dageshed.


David
_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org

_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140504/54637bfd/attachment-0005.htm>