Thank you Jason, most helpful.Jason Hare wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:21 pm The o vowel is supposed to be reduced, which means it cannot be represented by a vowel letter (mater lectionis). This became common practice in the Dead Sea Scrolls (and today), but it was contrary to the normal form of biblical Hebrew. So, it was written as chataf-kamats rather than as cholam.
I'll take your word for that Ducky. I have Bertonov's cd's, too lazy so I went straight to the Mamre site. But thanks for letting me know who the reader is on Mamre.ducky wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 9:55 amHi,Chris Watts wrote: ↑Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:54 am Hi Glen, and thankyou for your answer.
This is what I find very interesting then...
Some familiarity with grammatical rules in BH - fine. However in actual practise and only very occaisionally I wonder whether or not this is one of those situations where a pedantic sense of grammatical strictness took the throne. I listened to this verse in hebrew on mechon-mamre and he clearly pronounces the stress on the holom-vav, he clearly lengthens it meaning that he is pronouncing the Ketiv and not the qere. His pronounciation is the famous Israeli narrator on the radio Shlomo Bertonov I do believe. So my logical next question remains, why is there a qere, is it only because the ketivneeds to obey this grammar rule of a reduction before a lengthened vowel?
Chris Watts
The Reader in the Mamre site is Abraham Shmuelof.
(according to this site: https://www.catholic.co.il/?id=2821&cat ... lang=he&m=)
For Shlomo Bertonov... You can hear is voice in this site:
https://www.hebrew4christians.com/Onlin ... tonov.html
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTTTW3BQD3M
****
Anyway, I just heard this reading from the Mamre site - and he really put the stress on the O vowel (reading it: eshqOta), and that is a wrong reading. (his reading is not very accurate in general).
Thankyou Glenn for your input also. Glad that I heard it right.
Chris Watts