B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

All right, I took a day to cool my head, and I've decided that I'll hang around. I've been on B-Hebrew since 1999, and I just don't think I should give up on it, even if many people have. I'll just focus on the things that I want to talk about and try to keep my nose out of your posts, since they frustrate me.

Good luck with your presentation of these materials, Isaac. I'm gonna move on to my own things and let you hold your opinions.

Best regards.

Isaac Fried wrote:Jason, just before you go spare us a tiny moment to explain how in המשפט "there are two מ's there" when we obviously see there only one מ and hear there only one מ.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

I don't mean to drudge up an old grudge, but there ARE two mems there, becuase there is a definite article preceeding the noun. Unless it's a guttural letter, the letter following noun will take a dagesh.

Granted, it's not written. But the mem is preserved with a dagesh forte.

הַמִּשׁפַּט

Jonathan,

It's most clearly demonstrated with the verb נָתַן nāṯan in the perfect.

נָתַן + תִּי ← *נָתַ֫נְתִּי ← *נָתַ֫תְתִּי ← נָתַ֫תִּי
nāṯan + tî → *nātántî → *nāṯáṯtî → nāṯáttî

That are still those who actually say nāṯántî when speaking Hebrew in Israel, but it should be clear to everyone that the nun assimilated into the tav of the sufformative. It's quite clear in this example. The same is clear in how יִנְפֹּל becomes יִפֹּל. It's not operating on a different root. It's just that the nun assimilates into the peh.

It's clear a myriad of examples.

Indeed.