2008/12/1 Noah Witty <<a href="mailto:nwitty@optonline.net" target="_blank">nwitty@optonline.net</a>><div class="gmail_quote"><span dir="ltr"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"><div><blockquote type="cite"><pre>replaces the segol </pre>
</blockquote></div>
What's your source? Also, how would one know that the it is a segol
that the shalsheles is replacing? I think shalsheles is followed each
time by a pesik (vertical line), which is not the case with a segol.</div></blockquote><div><br>I don't know what sort of primary source would have this information, but I've seen this idea mentioned in a number of secondary sources. The line following the shalsheles may not be a p'sik (I've also been told such about the line following a munach l'garmeih); the presence of a p'sik, at any rate, is often (usually?) to separate between words that could be read in a heretical manner (e.g., Ya'eir HaShem / panav eilecha opposes the potential reading of that places the Sheim as an object with an implied subject, rather than as the Subject), and is then unrelated to the grammatical structure of the passuk.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"><div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>within a one-word secondary division </pre>
</blockquote></div>
this I <u>don't</u> get: what makes the word on which the shalsheles
is installed "a secondary division"?</div></blockquote><div><br>I originally didn't want to digress too much on the list, but I provided a little more information on this concept on my blog ( <a href="http://haprozdor.blogspot.com/2008/12/use-of-shalsheles.html" target="_blank">http://haprozdor.blogspot.com/2008/12/use-of-shalsheles.html</a> ). To provide an example of the concepts I described there, take Bereishis 39:8:<br>
<br>"Vayma'ein vayomer el eishes adonav hen adoni lo yada iti ma ba-bayis v'chol asher yesh lo nasan b'yadi."<br><br>The primary division of the passuk, indicated by the esnachta, is after the word ba-bayis. The axis of the passuk around which the division is made is the linkage between the compound statement of Yosef: yada vs. nasan. The secondary divisions of the first half of the passuk, are on the words vayma'ein, adonav, adoni, and iti. The tipecha on iti divides prepositional indirect object of Yosef's statement from the direct object, the zakeif on adoni divides the subject from the predicate, the zakeif on adonav separates the lead-up to Yosef's statement to his words, and the shalsheles on vayma'ein separates between the two verbs of the main part of the verse (vayma'ein and vayomer). The only tertiary division within the passuk is the pashta on vayomer, which separates between the implied subject and verb of the passuk and the direct object. It would be easier to understand with diagrams, I'm sure (and I don't understand the system entirely, myself, to explain it well). I've been told that Rav Breuer's /Ta'amei Hamikra Bekaf-aleph Sefarim Uv'sifrei Eme"t/ is a wonderful resource on the topic. /Chanting the Hebrew Bible: The Art of Cantillation/ by Joshua Jacobson has many examples of the concepts.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>that has no room for<br>a preceding zarka. Since segol is only used at the head </pre>
</blockquote></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Do you mean "end"?</div></blockquote><div><br>A theoretical primary subdivision of a passuk (i.e., before or after an esnachta) could contain the sequence of secondary disjunctives segol-zakeif-zakeif-tipecha, with tertiary and quaternary disjunctives and conjunctives interspersed. <br>
<br>Sorry for the lack of more concrete information, but I hope this sheds more light on the issues.<br><br>- Josh<br></div></div><br>