<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto">Is it possible that the that the second part if the פסוק is broken up like the first? (As it is in the other two.). Or that the absence of the words כל make it more likely not to have a זקף?<div><br></div><div><div style="direction: ltr;">Zuki</div><br><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-size: 13pt;">-- </span></div><div><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Yitzchak M. Gottlieb</span></div><div>zukigottlieb@gmail.com</div></div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote type="cite">On Jul 11, 2021, at 15:20, Danny Levy via Mesorah <mesorah@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="rtl"><div dir="ltr">In the first parasha of Matot there are 3 p'sukim with similar wording in their second halves:</div><div dir="ltr">30:5 and 30:12 - V'kamu kol n'dareha v'chol isar asher as'ra al nafshah yakum.</div><div dir="ltr">30:8 - V'kamu n'dareha ve'esareha asher as'ra al nafshah yakumu.</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">In 30:5 and 30:12 the major division of the half pasuk is indicated by a zakef katon on n'dareha. This is to be expected, as each of the two phrases has its own verb.</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">In 30:8, however, there is a r'via on nedareha. The major division of the half pasuk is not there but at the tipcha under nafshah. This is surprising, as the result is that both v'kamu and yakumu refer to both n'dareha ve'esareha. Two essentially identical verbs appear to be unnecessary. A zakef katon on n'dareha would appear to be more logical in this pasuk also.</div><div dir="ltr">Any explanation?</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Danny</div></div>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Mesorah mailing list</span><br><span>Mesorah@lists.aishdas.org</span><br><span>http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org</span><br></div></blockquote></div></body></html>