Plene writing and a missing dagesh, Gen. 31:12
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:25 am
I subscribe to the opinion that the dagesh is an ancient pre-niqud marking introduced as a reading prop to hint the sounds A I U, or the latter patax, xiriq, and qubutz. It is superfluous in plene writing, where the waw and the yod performs the same function. I am also in concordance with the opinion that the dagesh has, otherwise, no vocal function such as "doubling" the consonant marked with it. For instance, כִּנּוֹר KINOR has a dagesh in the letter N following a xiriq (a dot in an initial letter has a different function), but the plene כִּישוֹר comes with an empty $in.
So, having recently read Gen. 31:12
הָעַתֻּדִים הָעֹלִים עַל הַצֹּאן עֲקֻדִּים נְקֻדִּים וּבְרֻדִּים
I was intrigued by the lack of dagesh in the letter D of HA-ATUD-IYM. I looked the word up in other places and found it written in full, thus: עַתּוּדִים as in Num. 7:17. Apparently the missing waw after the letter T of HA-ATUD-IYM of Gen. 31:12 is a scribal oversight, and may be safely reinstated.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
So, having recently read Gen. 31:12
הָעַתֻּדִים הָעֹלִים עַל הַצֹּאן עֲקֻדִּים נְקֻדִּים וּבְרֻדִּים
I was intrigued by the lack of dagesh in the letter D of HA-ATUD-IYM. I looked the word up in other places and found it written in full, thus: עַתּוּדִים as in Num. 7:17. Apparently the missing waw after the letter T of HA-ATUD-IYM of Gen. 31:12 is a scribal oversight, and may be safely reinstated.
Isaac Fried, Boston University