Page 1 of 1

‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28 et al)

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:47 pm
by Joseph
Does the numeral ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28, Ex 16:1, Lev 23:34, etc) have an article? If not, how would it be written if it did?

Re: ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28 et al)

Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 10:53 am
by kwrandolph
Joseph wrote:Does the numeral ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28, Ex 16:1, Lev 23:34, etc) have an article? If not, how would it be written if it did?


Joseph:

The rule is that the particle prefixes ב and ל can have definite or indefinite meanings depending on their contexts.

In an unpointed text, there’s no difference in writing between the definite and indefinite meanings.

The Masoretes pointed the definite meanings differently from the indefinite meanings. It’s been so long since I last looked at the Masoretic points that I don’t want to put my foot in my mouth by giving the wrong points, so I’ll leave it to others to show how the Masoretes indicated the differences.

All the best, Karl W. Randolph.

Re: ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28 et al)

Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:58 pm
by Joseph
Thanks for your quick response. Sorry for not being clearer in my question. I'm more interested in form rather than function. Specifically, does the pointing as reflected in BHS and WLC indicate that an article is present in this word?

I'm trying to guard against a case of foot-in-mouth disease myself. I consulted a couple lexical databases on this form... Got two different answers.

Re: ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28 et al)

Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:26 pm
by Jemoh66
Yes the way it is pointed it is definite

Re: ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28 et al)

Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 10:26 pm
by Joseph
How would it be pointed otherwise?

Re: ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28 et al)

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:49 am
by Joseph
So, gave this a look again this morning. Seems like this word would be pointed the same either way. Any thoughts?

Re: ‎ בַּחֲמִשָּׁ֖ה (Gen. 18:28 et al)

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:49 pm
by Jemoh66
It's hard to tell if the /a/ in /ba/ is due to a back consonant or because it's definite. The context here send to demand a definite. The rule is that ב takes the vowel of the following t'nua chatufa. I think the masora takes this to be definite, and that's why they added the metheg