[Mesorah] Fwd: Re: Vayikra 19:24

[Mandel, Seth]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mandel, Seth <mandels at ou.org>
Date: April 24, 2018 at 4:48:25 PM GMT-3
Subject: Re: [Mesorah] Vayikra 19:24
To: Danny Levy <danestlev at gmail.com>

I am out of the States, so I did not get back to you before, and expected someon else to answer.
It seems to me that since you have 3 adjacent p’suqim, all 3 of which start with referring to a year, there is an attempt to use the same arrangement for the time phrase.
On the first and third, the year phrase is subordinated to another part of the pasuq.
A qeisar is qualitatively different from other trop, whether it be silly or etnahta. So to make the parallel smoother, they avoided having a qeisar on the year phrase in the second pasuq.
After reading all 3 p’suqim through several times with the trop, that is what seems to me.
IOW, the parallelismus overrides other considerations.
Parallelismus is underrated in its importance in most grammars. In practically every case, parallelismus also changes the words into a “pausal form,”
Seth Mandel




On April 24, 2018 at 4:08:21 PM GMT-3, Danny Levy via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
As nobody has responded, maybe one of the following two tentative suggestions will provoke a discussion that will lead us to a solution:

1. The Ba'alei Hamesorah are hinting al derekh hadrush, that if you abstain from eating the fruit in the first three years, in the fourth year the tree will have all its fruit.
Question: is there a precedent for te'amim al derekh hadrush instead of al derekh hap'shat?

2. The etnachta at "piryo" is a poetic parallel to the etnachta on "piryo" in the previous pasuk.
Question: If the etnachta would be at "harevi'it", "piryo" would have a zakef, a poetic parallel to the zakef on "piryo" in the next pasuk.  So why favor a parallel that disturbs the natural division of the pasuk over a parallel that retains the natural division of the pasuk?

Danny Levy

2018-04-22 21:37 GMT+03:00 Danny Levy <danestlev at gmail.com<mailto:danestlev at gmail.com>>:
Any thoughts on the unusual division of this pasuk?  The etnachta at "kol-piryo" appears to be in the middle of a phrase. Why isn't the etnachta at "harevi'it"?

Danny Levy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180424/0e0b6c06/attachment-0001.htm>