pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

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.
Glenn Dean
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 6:28 pm

pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Glenn Dean »

Hi:

In Gen 1:21 we see the word שָׁרְצ֨וּ - you pronunce that as "shor - tsu" (or is it "sha - re - tsu")

(I was at animatedhebrew.com, http://www.animatedhebrew.com/reader/ot ... beeri.html, and it sounds like they're pronoucing it as sha - re - tsu)

Thanxs!

Glenn
Last edited by Glenn Dean on Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:21 am, edited 2 times in total.
Jason Hare
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Jason Hare »

Technically sha-re-tsu [šārəṣû], but most will not pronounce the vocal sheva and will say shartsu.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
Glenn Dean
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 6:28 pm

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Glenn Dean »

thanxs Jason!

But can you leave the long vowel qamets in the pro-pretonic syllable? The accent is on tsu

it seems like it should be a qamets-hatuf

Glenn
Jason Hare
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Jason Hare »

Yes. If you look at Kutz and Josberger they specifically discuss the idea that in verbs the pre-tonic syllable tends to reduce and the one before to lengthen. It is normally marked in the MT with a meteg, which marks a long vowel before vocal sheva (שָֽׁרְצוּ) in addition to marking full vowels in syllables that would normally be expected to reduce (that is, distant syllables).
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
Jason Hare
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Jason Hare »

So, in nouns we know that the pre-tonic syllable lengthens (the "near" syllable) and syllables further back attempt to reduce. If this rule is broken, the first of however many syllables is marked with meteg.

אֲ|נָ|שִׁים - The tone syllable is ־שִׁים. The "near" syllable is ־נָ־ (which is lengthened from the historic patach). The "distant" syllable is אֲ־ (which is reduced from the historic patach). The historic vowels were *אַנַשׁ for plurals in most cases, even for segolatesץ

*מַלַך ← *מַ|לַ|כִים ← מְ|לָ|כִים ← מְלָכִים

When you add the article, it is הַ with dagesh. So, ּהַ​◌ּ + מְלָכִים ← הַמְּלָכִים, but that doesn't happen with gutturals. They reject dagesh with varying outcomes. In the case of our אֲנָשִׁים, we see "compensatory lengthening." The dagesh is rejected, and the patach becomes qamats. Since that qamats is in a "distant" syllable, it also pairs with meteg.

הַ​​◌ּ + אֲנָשִׁים ← *הַאֲּנָשִׁים ← הָֽאֲנָשִׁים

See the meteg on the long vowel in the D₂ syllable? It doesn't have to be a long vowel. It can be a short vowel, too—it marks any full vowel in a distant syllable.

הַ​◌ּ + עָרִים ← *הַעָּרִים ← הֶֽעָרִים

In this case, it is in the D₁ syllable, one before the near syllable. Every D (distant) syllable is expected to reduce because it is far from the tone. In order not to reduce, it must be: (1) in a closed syllable or (2) historically long (marked with a mater lectionis in most cases). Otherwise, it is marked with meteg according to the standard.

To sum up: the two most important uses of meteg are to mark a long vowel before sheva (so that you know to read it long and to render the sheva vocal) and to mark a full vowel in a distant syllable.

There are other more nuanced uses of meteg, depending on the scribe's habits, and later manuscripts tend to have more metegs than earlier ones, but this is basically what one needs to know about the tiny little mark.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
Glenn Dean
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 6:28 pm

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Glenn Dean »

lots to digest - thanxs for posting all this info! Let me get back to you later with questions

Glenn
Glenn Dean
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 6:28 pm

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Glenn Dean »

if I'm following you, the reason צ֫וּ|רְ|שָׁ is incorrect is because the distant syllable would have reduced (i.e. qamets reducing).

So, the correct pronunciation is either shor-tsu or shar-tsu.

can you explain why shor-tsu is incorrect?

it seems like shar-tsu is incorrect because you have a closed unaccented syllable with a long vowel (and there is no meteg),

Glenn
ducky
Posts: 480
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by ducky »

Hi Glenn,

what is the basic form of שרצו?
שרצו is perfect, 3rd person, plural.
it basic form is the same - only in singular.

so it is perfect, 3rd person, singular.

Now, check that form.
They שרצו
He שרץ (as in Ex. 7:28)
וְשָׁרַץ הַיְאֹר צְפַרְדְּעִים

You read it Sharats.
the SH letter had a vowel-sound of "a".

So now, when the שרץ turned to שרצו, the SH keeps its basic vowel "a".

So it is Shar.tsu ( I wrote "." to sign the mobile sheva).

***
Also notice, that the R in the basic form שרץ=sharats has a vowel "a"
but in שרצו it has a sheva.
So now you also know that the sheva in the R of שרצו is a mobile sheva - because it is actually a vowel that was reduced.
David Hunter
Glenn Dean
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 6:28 pm

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Glenn Dean »

Hi ducky, thanxs for the info!

Can we look at Amos 3:14 where we see the word פָּקְדִ֫י (pronounced poq - di). The original word is פְקַד

There appears to be a fundamental difference between the word in Gen 1:14 and in Amos 3:14.

Gen 1:14, original word = שָׁרַץ
Amos 3:14, original word = פְקַד

is this difference in the two original words the reason in Gen 1:14 it's pronounced shar - tsu (qamets in near syllable), while in Amos 3:14 it's pronounced poq - di (qamets-hatuf in near syllable) ?

Glenn
Refael Shalev
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 12:07 pm

Re: pronunciation question on Gen 1:21

Post by Refael Shalev »

Hi Glenn,
The basic form is פקוד I don't know how it calls in english maybe infinitive?
Refael Shalev
Post Reply