B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

Can someone point me to a resource which covers the use of the PASEQ punctuation mark in the MT?

It is the "pipe" symbol (actually unicode point u+05C0) that is found occasionally in the MT such as in Ruth 1:2

וְשֵׁם֩ אִשְׁתּ֨וֹ נָעֳמִ֜י וְשֵׁ֥ם שְׁנֵֽי־ בָנָ֣יו ׀ מַחְל֤וֹן וְכִלְיוֹן֙

I have a digital copy of "The Note-Line in the Hebrew Scriptures Commonly Called Paseq, or Pesiq" by James Kennedy written in 1903. However, I was curious if there are additional resources readily available that might be more up to date.


If anyone is interested in the resource I have, it is freely available at:
http://books.google.com/books?id=0WdBAAAAYAAJ

Thank you for your time.

See:

Israel Yeivin. Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah. Scholars Press, SBL, IOMS 1980, pp. 215-218.

William Wickes. Two Treatises on the Accentuation of the Old Testament. New York: Ktav 1970 (reprint), pp. 120-129.

See also:

P. R, M. S. Etude Critique des Paseq des Livres en Prose a la Lumiere des Nouvelles eories sur les Chaines de la
Cantilation. IOMS v (1983).

F Z. Before the Masora. Lanham, New York, Oxford: University Press of America 2001.

With regard to Ruth 1:2 - this is not a pasēq, but a comound accent "mūnaḥ legarmēh".

Petr Tomášek

Thank you for indicating these additional materials for the understanding of the PASEQ.

I have been able to locate PDFs of Wickes two works:

• A Treatise on the Accentuation of the Three so-called Poetical Books of the Old Testament, Psalms, Proverbs, and Job
  A Treatise on the Accentuation of the Twenty-One so-called Prose Books of the Old Testament

I see that Wickes' works predate Kennedy's work by about 2 decades.

• Kennedy (1903)
  Wickes Prose (1887)
  Wickes Poetical (1881)

In regard to Ruth 1:2 Wickes posits that the combination of PASEQ with Munah creates the accent known as L'garmeh (although I think I remember reading somewhere(?) that L'garmeh required a following Rebia). From a purely technological view, the two marks (PASEQ and Legarmeh) are identical being represented by the same Unicode glyph or character code (u+05C0). Thus, visually, at this time, one could not argue for a distinction. Kennedy argues against the designation of Legarmeh posited by Wickes as Kennedy sees the Note-line or PASEQ predating the accents such as Munah and Rebia and thus the designation of Legarmeh is an obfuscation (my word; his view -- cf Kennedy p 17 ff). As such, Wickes does not list any occurrences of the PASEQ in Ruth (seeing them all as an example of Legarmeh) while Kennedy cites 6 occurrences.

Your comment has been very helpful. I hope to obtain more of the materials you cite to further my understanding. I am now considering making these free PDFs available on my website as a collection on the topic.

Thank you.