[Mesorah] Emet Trops

Wed Nov 22 10:10:50 PST 2023

On my previous email I wrote about the pasuk from Mishlei:
לַֽעֲלוּקָ֨ה ׀ שְׁתֵּ֥י בָנוֹת֮ הַ֤ב ׀ הַ֥ב שָׁל֣וֹשׁ הֵ֭נָּה לֹ֣א תִשְׂבַּ֑עְנָה אַ֝רְבַּ֗ע לֹא־אָ֥מְרוּ הֽוֹן׃

I am not sure if I was right.  Indeed one possibility is this:The second "Hav" is Ole VeYored. LaAluka is a title, in my opinion (like "LeDavid"), and the trope is Azla LeGarme, functions as a Temurat Ole VeYored. 
The nikud Patach under the letter Lamed, is not "to the". It is actually a Sheva that was converted to Patach. The reason is the Chataf Patach under the letter Ain.
But there is another possibility. The trop on the word "Vanot" is Tzinor. This is a trop type "Mishne".This trop "nominates" a Shalish. This Shalish is the Azla LeGarme on the word "La'Aluka". The Patach under the letter Lamed is "to the".
While the first option "Aluka" is the name of the sage who wrote the Mashal,The second option says that the creature Aluka (leech).
Which one makes more sense?
Kol Tuv,
Aharon Gal201-414-7190 

    On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 12:30:34 PM EST, rabbirichwolpoe <rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com> wrote:  

All the above is guide me to think that the Temura is not 100% Temura. It does not take with it all the rules of the trops, of which she replacing.>>
I kinda thought all along that this is the most obvious solution.

 RRW

-------- Original message --------From: galsaba--- via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org> Date: 11/22/23 08:51 (GMT-05:00) To: Yitzhak Ajzner <yitzhakajz at gmail.com> Cc: mesorah at aishdas.org Subject: Re: [Mesorah] Emet Trops 
Prior to email the group I thought about the idea that there was influence from 25:1, as the three words are the same. Possible. Although 25:1 is a short pasuk.If this is the case, then may be the melody of the same three words is identical in these two verses, and therefore, the trops too.
As for the rules, why should we think that the rule of "Etnach will never come to the right of Ole Veyored, is stronger that the rule that the Temura of Ole Veyored is always Azla LeGarme, and the temura of Etnach is always Pazer?
See the following from Tehilim 9:7. הָֽאוֹיֵ֨ב | תַּ֥מּוּ חֳרָב֗וֹת לָ֫נֶ֥צַח וְעָרִ֥ים נָתַ֑שְׁתָּ אָבַ֖ד זִכְרָ֣ם הֵֽמָּה:

How is it possible that we have two Ole Veyored (actually, the first one is Temurat Ole VeYored) at the same pasuk?See the pasuk from Tehulim 98:1

מִזְמ֡וֹר שִׁ֤ירוּ לַֽיהוָ֨ה ׀ שִׁ֣יר חָ֭דָשׁ כִּֽי־נִפְלָא֣וֹת עָשָׂ֑ה הוֹשִֽׁיעָה־לּ֥וֹ יְ֝מִינ֗וֹ וּזְר֥וֹעַ קׇדְשֽׁוֹ׃

How is it possible to have two Etnach (actually, the first one is Temurat Etnach) at the same pasuk?

See Mishlei 30:15

לַֽעֲלוּקָ֨ה ׀ שְׁתֵּ֥י בָנוֹת֮ הַ֤ב ׀ הַ֥ב שָׁל֣וֹשׁ הֵ֭נָּה לֹ֣א תִשְׂבַּ֑עְנָה אַ֝רְבַּ֗ע לֹא־אָ֥מְרוּ הֽוֹן׃
The second "Hav" is Ole VeYored. LaAluka is a title, in my opinion (like "LeDavid"), and the trope is Azla LeGarme, functions as a Temurat Ole VeYored. How is it possible to have two Ole VeYored (one is temurat Ole VeYored) in the same pasuk?
All the above is guide me to think that the Temura is not 100% Temura. It does not take with it all the rules of the trops, of which she replacing.
So, the pazer on the word LeDavid" in Pasuk 28:1, is Temurat Etnach? Is it Temurat Ole Veyored? or may be we need to consider it not completely as Temura of either one. The pazer here is a strong mafsik. If you do not see it as 100% the replacement of Etnach, then there is no reason why it win ill not come to the right of Ole VeYored.
By the way, seems to me that also the trop Shalshelet in the 21 sefarim, is no 100% temurat Segol. It is stronger.
Kol Tuv,

Aharon Gal201-414-7190 

    On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 04:34:30 AM EST, Yitzhak Ajzner <yitzhakajz at gmail.com> wrote:  

What an extraordinarily advanced level of discussion!

I don’t see how your alternative explanations to Rav Breuer’s presentation of the exceptions could be what is behind this.

An Etnahta never divides an entire verse, if there are 6 words or more to the left of the main division. In the verse here, there are 11 words to the left of the first word. Consequently, it seems to me unreasonable to suggest that an Etnahta is being replaced. Furthermore, proposing that an Oleh Ve’Yored then divides the left of what might have been an Etnahta, seems even more unlikely. Even musically, I somehow doubt that it would have been plausible to chant and Etnahta, followed by an Oleh Ve'yored. Say, like singing a Zakef after a Tipha.

Rav Breuer’s presentation, on the other hand, suggests a relatively simple anomaly: oops, Pazer instead of Azla-Geresh as a Temura to an Oleh Ve'yored.

Of course, the extra Oleh Ve'yored to the left complicates that explanation. But it remains easier to digest an Oleh Ve'yored dividing the domain of a temura of another Oleh Ve'yored; than Oleh Ve'yored dividing the domain of a temura of an Etnahta.

Perhaps the exception could be explained as an influence of the Psalm appearing 3 chapters earlier (Tehillim 25):

לְדָוִ֡ד אֵלֶ֥יךָ יְ֝דוָ֗ד נַפְשִׁ֥י אֶשָּֽׂא

Best,

Yitzhak

From: Mesorah <mesorah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org> On Behalf Of galsaba--- via Mesorah
Sent: Tuesday, 21 November 2023 3:25 PM
To: Yitzchak Gottlieb <zukigottlieb at gmail.com>
Cc: mesorah at aishdas.org
Subject: Re: [Mesorah] Emet Trops

Very nice !

I am not sure if Breuer was right about these two verses.

No doubt that these two are exceptions.

The question is, what is the exception?

Is it what Breuer wrote in his book?

Or

Pazer in these two verses came instead of Etnach, and the exception is that here we have Etnach to the right side of Ole Veyored, and we have two Etnach in one pasuk.

Either way, it shows us that Pazer and Azla LeGarme are not complete Temurot.

thanks

Aharon Gal

201-414-7190

On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 07:28:43 AM EST, Yitzchak Gottlieb <zukigottlieb at gmail.com> wrote: 

I don't have an answer, but Breuer (pg 315) has this פסוק as an exception in two ways:

1. One of two places a פזר is a תמורה for an עולה ויורד.

2. The only place where an עולה ויורד splits a מלך rather than a whole פסוק.

Zuki

-- 

Yitzchak M. Gottlieb

zukigottlieb at gmail.com

On Nov 21, 2023, at 03:50, galsaba--- via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote:

I have a question regarding the following pasuk:

"לְדָוִ֡ד

 אֵ֘לֶ֤יךָ יְדוָ֨ד ׀ אֶקְרָ֗א   צוּרִי֮ אַֽל־תֶּחֱרַ֪שׁ מִ֫מֶּ֥נִּי 

 פֶּן־תֶּֽחֱשֶׁ֥ה מִמֶּ֑נִּי    וְ֝נִמְשַׁ֗לְתִּי עִם־י֥וֹרְדֵי בֽוֹר׃" (תהילים כח:א)

I put the spaces as they appear in Tehilim The edition on Mosad HaRav Kuk.

It is clear that there is a long pause after "LeDavid". The reason is the ta'am Pazer. Ta'am pazer when it "rules" just its own word, ie, there is no any word before it, in this case this trope is not a "shalish" (the weakest level), but it is the "temura" ("replacement") of the Etnach.

In this case, how it is possible that Etnach (its "temura") will appear before the trop Ole VeYored?

How it is possible to have two Etnach (one is a temura) in the same pasuk?

Aharon Gal

201-414-7190

On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 11:11:20 AM EDT, Jeremy Rosenbaum Simon via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: 

This isn’t really a dikduk question. Without nikkud, the morphology is not fully specified. It is a compositional question. Which meaning of the word gives an idiomatically correct sentence. The answer to this, I think, relies as much on the use of the word מפי as the form of למדן. The broader context could also help. In other words, you could know every page of a reference grammar inside and out, and still not be able to answer this question.

Jeremy 

On Sep 13, 2022, at 10:37 AM, micha--- via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Zvi Lampel <zvilampel at gmail.com>
Date: Sep 13, 2022, 9:49 AM -0400
To: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
Subject: A dikduk question

Hi, Micha. 

Could you forward this question to those who would have an answer? 

In this sentence,

וכולן למדן משה רבינו ע''ה מפי הגבורה

does למדן mean ''he learned them''' or ''he taught them'''? (Nikud is not given.)

Thanks,

Zvi Lampel 

_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org__;!!BhJSzQqDqA!RzUh0IwM2l3_GU2S_5byzVSxUqJxl9gBp-ufbu3ck6OqVB4lz6wAwMCxjnQORTmFMatn04ky7vyTdGcesJEUljQp$  

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

_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
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/20231122/ecf87d6e/attachment-0001.htm>