Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Classical Hebrew morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by Isaac Fried »

We read there
בְּיוֹם עֲשׂוֹת יהוה אֱלֹהִים אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם
KJV: "in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens"
with עֲשׂוֹת marked with the the curious ניקוּד of חטף-פתח hateph-pathah, which appears to consist of a patah and a nearby schwa (called here חטף hateph for a תנוּעה חטוּפה.)
I recall that in school we were told the "official" understanding of this mark as indicating a schwa "mobile". With time I came to deny the existence of this sound, and now believe that the hateph-pathah (or rather the schwa-pathah) is a compromise marking combined to accommodate different reading traditions heard at the time of the NIQUD insertion; one with a schwa and one with a patah.
I always read the hateph-pathah as an A, namely עֲשׂוֹת ASOT (as I also don't distinguish in reading between an aleph and an eyin).

Isaac Fried, Boston University
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by Isaac Fried »

Today I have heard from someone knowledgeable the following interesting understanding of the reading of the hateph-pathah: the pathah at the side of the schwa (the hateph) is placed there to indicate that the schwa needs to be extended into a schwa "mobile". It is clever but, in my opinion, a mere muse. There is no schwa "mobile" in Hebrew.

Isaac Fried, Boston University
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by Isaac Fried »

I also follow the ארץ ישראל Eretz-Israel tradition and make no distinction in the reading of the qametz and the patah; I read them both as A, and so also the hateph-qametz.
The Hebrew Academy in Jerusalem insists, in an official directive, on the readings
צָהֳרַיִם (midday) tsohorayim
מָחֳרָת (next day) mohorat
נָעֳמִי No‘omi
which I find tasteless and awkward. Exercising my right to freedom of expression I prefer in all my public readings the, officially frowned upon: tsaharayim, maharat, Na'ami.

Isaac Fried, Boston University
ducky
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by ducky »

Hello

It is indeed a replacement of the Mobile Sheva
it comes in that place in the letter Ayin because the letter Ayin is a throat consonant and therefore it doesn't have a Mobile Sheva but Hataph instead

Check the form of another word that its letter is not from the throat (like שבות from שבה)
Obadiah 1:11
בְּיוֹם שְׁבוֹת זָרִים חֵילוֹ
here the letter ש gets the Mobile Sheva
and so is עשות "should be" written.
But because it starts with the Ayin, then instead of the Mobile Sheva, comes the Hataph
David Hunter
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by Isaac Fried »

David Hunter wrote
It is indeed a replacement of the Mobile Sheva
First, it is not clear to me what "replacement" means. Second, how do you read עֲשׂוֹת, ASOT, or do you read the the hataph-patah in some "curtailed" form, in some חטוּפה form?

Isaac Fried, Boston University
ducky
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by ducky »

Hello Isaac

I read the Ayin is עשות exactly the way you read the Ayin in לעשות (the last word in the previous verse)
David Hunter
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by Isaac Fried »

Ducky wrote
Obadiah 1:11
בְּיוֹם שְׁבוֹת זָרִים חֵילוֹ
here the letter ש gets the Mobile Sheva
The letter ש does not "get" a "Mobile" schwa. If you prefer to "move" the schwa, replacing it by an e, to read שְׁבוֹת as shEvot, then it turns into what you call "mobile". I do not do it since I find shEvot unpleasant to the ear, and read it always curtly as shvot. I believe that this is what I hear Hebrew speaking people do. עֲשׂוֹת I read as Asot with an initial A. Similarly, לַאֲשֶׁר I read la-Asher (capital letters are only just so they stand out.)
Consider the act שלח-אנוּ = שָׁלַחְנוּ, 'we have sent', that has a schwa under the letter xet. The highly "inflected" form יִשְׁלַחֲךָ = היא-שלח-אכה, 'he will send you', is with a hateph-pathah under the xet, and I read it yishlAkhakhah.
As for the biblical word מַחֲבַת, 'frying pan', of Lev. 6:14
עַל מַחֲבַת בַּשֶּׁמֶן תֵּעָשֶׂה מֻרְבֶּכֶת תְּבִיאֶנָּה
here I follow the מנהג ארץ ישראל and call it populistically מַחְבַת with a schwa (always נח) under the letter xet, as in my wife saying to me in the morning:
יצחק תביא את המַחְבַת ונעשה חביתה
Otherwise, שְׁבוֹת = שב-הוּא-את with the internal הוּא referring to the performer of the act שבה, here the זָרִים, the foreigners.

Isaac Fried, Boston University
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by Isaac Fried »

The thing is not only a מַחֲבַת but a מַחֲבַט as well since I
חובט בביצה טוֹב טוֹב עם המזלג לערבב את החלמוֹן בחלבוֹן

Isaac Fried, Boston University
ducky
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by ducky »

Hello Isaac

you are arguing about a term which we probably define differently.

A grammatical Mobile Sheva is any Sheva that is derived from a vowel.
(but a Sheva can be mobile also from other reasons)

Once you connect a Sheva to the next letter, it is mobile. It doesn't matter if you read it as "o", "a", "e" or just "run with it" (zero-vowel) - all of these styles are mobile.

The reason that you pronounce some of the mobile Sheva as "e" (like מנורה Menora)
and some as zero-vowel (like תמונה temuna-->tmuna)
is not because of grammar reason or rule
it is for Phonology reasons

These are two different subjects.
David Hunter
ducky
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Gen. 2:4, חטף-פתח hateph-pathah

Post by ducky »

Also,

it is not that the ש is not mobilized. As I said, it is for Phonology reason that this letter is easy to be pronounced with as "no-vowel" with any letter that comes after it.

But let's take a theoretical word. שְׁצוּפָה
would you not mobilize the ש in this case?

As for מחבת - this is actually a silent Sheva that the throaty ח naturally create a tiny vowel.
and Check the word מחסה that is voweled with a silent Sheva and also with a Hataph.
It is just a matter of pronunciation, and not "pure-grammar"
David Hunter
Post Reply