[Mesorah] "pausal forms"

[Mandel, Seth via Mesorah]

As I have commented many times, the Masorah is not a matter of "grammar," i.e. what is the correct grammatical form.  Such an idea, that there are some rules that dictate what the proper form of a word will be, did not exist until a couple of centuries ago; grammar historically was descriptive, not prescriptive.  The origin of the idea of "prescriptive grammar," that one form is right and one form is wrong, was a product not of linguistics, but of sociology; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription for a discussion of how it arose.
[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Real_Academia_Espa%C3%B1ola%2C_Madrid_-_view_2.JPG/160px-Real_Academia_Espa%C3%B1ola%2C_Madrid_-_view_2.JPG]<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription>

Linguistic prescription - Wikipedia<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription>
en.wikipedia.org
Linguistic prescription (or prescriptivism) is the practice of elevating one variety or manner of language use over another. It may imply that some forms are ...

Linguistically, grammar is attempt to show how a language works, and the forms are what are attested by native speakers.  In the case of texts, the forms are what are written in the text, and they are not governed by some person's idea of what the "proper/correct" form should be.  They are the basic data which grammar only can attempt to systematize.
In trying to analyze forms in the T'NaKh, the first step is to describe what the forms attested are.  In almost every case, you will discover that there are various forms attested.  This should be very familiar to anyone who learns Torah, that there are "wheels within wheels," rules, subrules, and exceptions. [Note that the Rambam holds that "learning Hebrew" is a mitzva from the Torah, and he did not mean learning the prescriptive rules. So it only stands to reason that it has wheels within wheels, like all mitzvoth do.]
All this is a general rule, but it is worth remembering concerning a question that was sent to me by R. Sholom Simon regarding "pausal forms."  Most grammars just say that many nouns and verbs have different forms that occur in a pausal position, which is normally marked by the trop silluq/sof pasuq or etnahta.  So Sholom inquired about the verse in Bamidbar 9:2,
ט:ב וְיַעֲשׂוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת-הַפָּסַח בְּמוֹעֲדוֹ.
the form "posach" appears with a tip’ha trop which is a mafsiq, but not considered "pausal."

To understand the issue, you really have to look at all the data.  Once you do, you see "pausal" forms appearing quite often in places that are not considered a "pause."
Let me just list some "pausal" forms that appeared in other portions that we read on Pesach:
D'varim 16:11:
טז:יא וְשָׂמַחְתָּ לִפְנֵי יְיָ אֱלֹקֶיךָ, אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ וְעַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתֶךָ וְהַלֵּוִי אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ וְהַגֵּר וְהַיָּתוֹם וְהָאַלְמָנָה אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבֶּךָ, בַּמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר יְיָ אֱלֹקֶיךָ לְשַׁכֵּן שְׁמוֹ שָׁם.
“uvittekha” with a zarqa, “va’amatekha” with a segol. Only “b’qirbekha” seems to be consistent with the rule, appearing with a etnahta.
טז:יד וְשָׂמַחְתָּ בְּחַגֶּךָ, אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ וְעַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתֶךָ וְהַלֵּוִי וְהַגֵּר וְהַיָּתוֹם וְהָאַלְמָנָה אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ.
“b’haggekha” with an etnahta, but “uvittekha” with a pashta, “va’amatekha” with a zaqef.
טז:טז שָׁלוֹשׁ פְּעָמִים בַּשָּׁנָה יֵרָאֶה כָל-זְכוּרְךָ אֶת-פְּנֵי יְיָ אֱלֹקֶיךָ בַּמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחָר, בְּחַג הַמַּצּוֹת וּבְחַג הַשָּׁבֻעוֹת וּבְחַג הַסֻּכּוֹת, וְלֹא יֵרָאֶה אֶת-פְּנֵי יְהוָה רֵיקָם.

“yivhar,” a "pausal" form, with a zaqef.
Once one becomes sensitized to the phenomenon, one sees that these forms are all over, like cherries in fruitcake.  In
Vayyiqra 11:3t, which we read 2 weeks ago:

יא:לה וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר-יִפֹּל מִנִּבְלָתָם עָלָיו יִטְמָא, תַּנּוּר וְכִירַיִם יֻתָּץ טְמֵאִים הֵם, וּטְמֵאִים יִהְיוּ לָכֶם.
“yuttatz” again with a tipha.
So perhaps a more accurate way of describing the situation is that some nouns and verbs appear in two forms.  One form is almost always used at the end of a pasuq and in the middle with an etnahta, but is also used in other places where the traditional reading (the Masorah) indicates the end of a clause, or in many cases of parallelismus membrorum.
For those enquiring minds who like to know more than they perhaps should, the latter phenomenon is also attested in L’shon Chazal.  In the good vocalized texts of the Mishna from the early Medieval period, such as the Kaufman Manuscript, words at the end of a clause/sentence do not normally have a “pausal” form, but forms in parallelismus membrorum usually do.  This is unknown to most people, because they are not familiar with the old vocalized Mishnayot.



Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel
Rabbinic Coordinator
The Orthodox Union

Voice (212) 613-8330     Fax (212) 613-0718     e-mail mandels at ou.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170430/e1be008a/attachment-0004.htm>