<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-text-html" lang="x-western"> <font size="+3"><br>
The word haleluhu appears 16 times in the Tana"kh, all of them
in T'hillim. In fourteen of the occurences, the word hal'luhu is
followed by a word whose first letter is one of the bg"d kf"t
letters. Without going into the intricacies of dikduk, one can
say that, in general,</font><font size="+3"> if the word
hal'luhu has a ta'am mafsik</font><font size="+3"> the following
bg"d kf"t has a dagesh. if the two words are connected by a
ta'am m'chabber the bg"d kf"t is rafa<br>
<br>
Thirteen of the occurences are concentrated in two p'rakim of
T'hillim, 148 and 150. Four of them in 148, the longer perek
and 9 in 150, the short last perek of Tehilim. As these p'rakim
are read daily in pesukei d'zimra, one doesn't have to be a
tillim-zuger to know them.<br>
<br>
According to R' Wolf Heidenheim in his mei-iti t'hilim and in
all of his siddurim, all of the bgd" kf"t have d'geshim and all
of the hal'luhu's have a ta'am mafsik.<br>
<br>
Almost all tanakhim published after the Roedelheim, including
1859 Shocken mikraot g'dolot</font><font size="+3"> </font><font
size="+3">(Shlomo Netter), Koren, etc., </font><font size="+3">have
one change:</font><font size="+3"> (Sorry, I don't have an
Artscroll to check.) In 148, they have hal'luhu khol mal'akhav.
And the hal'luhu has a ta'am m'chaber so one can't tell which
came first, the chicken or the egg.<br>
<br>
And now to the modern world with many more available sources:
All the accurate kitvei yad, including of course</font><font
size="+3"><font size="+3"> </font></font><font size="+3">the
Keter and the Leningrad codex have two more differences. In 150,
we have hal'luhu vigvurotav and hal'luhu v'tziltz'lei shama'.
Assuming we know the correct version, and find it in Breuer and
the Bar-Ilan Keter. BTW, the Ish Matzliach siddur also has it
"correct".<br>
<br>
In all three occurences without dagesh, the hal'luhu has a ta'am
m'chabber. <br>
<br>
All three are also in short sentences with two hal'luhu's the
first without dagesh and the second with. Just like mi
khamokha ba-elim H', mi kamokha neddar bakodesh and its many
explanations which never quite satisfied me.</font><br>
<font size="+3">
</font>
<div class="moz-text-html" lang="x-western"> <font size="+3"><br>
</font><font size="+3">Any ideas other than the inaccuracies of
copiers and printers? Am I the only one who finds these
things interesting</font><br>
<div class="moz-text-html" lang="x-western"><font size="+3"><br>
<br>
bivrakha,<br>
<br>
David</font><br>
</div>
<font size="+3"></font><font size="+3"><br>
</font> </div>
<font size="+3"> <br>
</font><font size="+3"><br>
</font> </div>
</body>
</html>