No dagesh in tav?

A place for those new to Biblical Hebrew to ask basic questions about the language of the Hebrew Bible.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Post Reply
David Brostoff
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:50 am

No dagesh in tav?

Post by David Brostoff »

At the start of Genesis 2:4, why does the initial tav of תוֹלְד֧וֹת 'generations' not have a dagesh but in Genesis 6:9 it does?

Thank you,

David
ducky
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: No dagesh in tav?

Post by ducky »

the cantillation mark in the previous word אלה is different

When the previous word ends with an opened syllable and it has a conjunctive mark, then the next word would come without the lene Dagesh in its first letter

But if the previous word has a disjunctive mark, then the next word would get a lene Dagesh in its first letter

(There are cases that the previous word would end with an opened syllable and it has a conjunctive mark - but you would still see a Dagesh in the first letter of the next word.
But that would not be a lene Dagesh)
David Hunter
David Brostoff
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:50 am

Re: No dagesh in tav?

Post by David Brostoff »

Thank you for the explanation -- I appreciate your help.

I note the munach in אֵ֣לֶּה of Gen. 2:4, but isn't the mehuppakh in of Gen. 6:9 אֵ֚לֶּה also conjunctive, not disjunctive?

David
ducky
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: No dagesh in tav?

Post by ducky »

In Gen 6:9 the mark is called Yetiv
אֵ֚לֶּה תּֽוֹלְדֹ֣ת נֹ֔חַ
Notice that this mark comes before the vowel mark of the letter Aleph

The Mahpach comes after the vowel mark
For example:
Gen 36:20
אֵ֤לֶּה בְנֵֽי־שֵׂעִיר֙
Notice that the Mahpach comes after the vowel mark of the letter Aleph
and also notice that the letter B (of בני) is without Lene Dagesh.
David Hunter
David Brostoff
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:50 am

Re: No dagesh in tav?

Post by David Brostoff »

Thank you -- now I get it.

David
Post Reply