Saying the quiet part out loud

[bdenckla]

I have written another long winding tale on the same theme as my Tale of the Qadma.

This tale is called Saying the quiet part out loud.

This tale is about the failure to mark two cases of ketiv velo qere in 2 Samuel.

[Jason Hare]

I love the last line of this tale: “The errors of the naqdan are probably what made the Masoretic error-detection mechanism fail for WLC.” Also the fact that the Aleppo Codex did not commit the error.

Is there any chance of you opining on the distinct attempts to point הליהוה in Deut 32.6 and why the Aleppo Codex does it correctly and the Leningrad Codex gets it wrong?

[bdenckla]

Is there any chance of you opining on the distinct attempts to point הליהוה in Deut 32.6 and why the Aleppo Codex does it correctly and the Leningrad Codex gets it wrong?

For now I can point you to what Avi Kadish has written about this issue in the MAM documentation.

I'll also (attempt to) reproduce that documentation here, below:


הַ לְיְהֹוָה֙ (מ:הערה) בספרי תימן הַֽלְיהֹוָה֙ בתיבה אחת

• כתיב=ל-גדולות ומ״ש (ה״א גדולה ורווח לאחריה) וכן הוא בספרי ספרד ואשכנז
• ניקוד=אש ומ״ש (ועל פיו בכל הדפוסים הרגילים ובקורן)
• א=<הַ לְיְהוָה֙> (אות ה״א רגילה)? או אולי <הַ לְיְהוָה֙> (אות ה״א גדולה)? האות קצת גדולה, אבל קשה לומר באופן מובהק שמדובר על ה״א גדולה.
• ל=הֲ־לַיהוָה֙ (בה״א רגילה מנוקדת בחתף פתח ומוקפת, ופתח בלמ״ד)
• ש1=הַ־ליְהוָה֙ (ה״א רגילה מנוקדת בפתח ומוקפת, והשוא ביו״ד בלבד)
• במקראות גדולות דפוס ראשון הַליְהֹוָה (ה״א רגילה מנוקדת בפתח ובלי רווח כלל לאחריה, והשווא ביו״ד בלבד).
• גם בספרי תימן תיבה אחת בלי רווח <הַֽלְיהֹוָה֙>, וראו פנקובר, נוסח התורה, עמ' 69, 71.

(I realize this is not much help to readers of this forum who don't have much Hebrew, but figured it was better than nothing. You can sort of painfully figure out what is intended with Google Translate, although this documentation contains many abbreviations that may be difficult for human and computer alike!)

[Jason Hare]

The pointing must take into account the pointing of אֲדֹנָי, of course. In the Aleppo Codex, this word regularly lacks the ḥolam (אֲדנָי), and this is why we also see יְהוָה far more frequently than יְהוָֹה—dropping the ḥolam in imitation of the word whose vowels it has adopted.

In the Aleppo Codex, it is as if the combination of הֲ + לְ + אֲדנָי first combined the interrogative particle with the lamed prefix (הֲ + לְ > הַלְ) and then attaches this to the noun (הַלְאֲדנָי). This is why there are two shvas together (הַלְיְהוָה). This is the best explanation for what we find there.

The fact that the Leningrad Codex pointed it otherwise is the result of the fact that the combination הַלְאֲדנָי or הֲלַאֲדנָי appears nowhere in the text of the Bible, nor does it appear with the Tetragrammaton anywhere other than in this verse. The combination was novel to the nakdanim, so they came to different decisions. The nakdan of L decided first to join the lamed to the name and then to join the interrogative, but it was separated off with makaf to demonstrate uncertainty (in my opinion).

I much prefer the Aleppo Codex handling of the pointing there. What do you think?

[ducky]

Hi,

Not only that.
As a general rule, The Aleph in the name of God (When supposed to be reduced) is always to be non-voweled (and be not pronounced) when it comes after the prefix L (+K+B+V).

In this case, the Leningrad writes the letter Y with Sheva (not as was written in the above post), as if we should pronounce the Aleph?
******