On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
Notice that in Habakkuk 2:9 it is בֶּצַע רָע
הוֹי בֹּצֵעַ בֶּצַע רָע לְבֵיתוֹ
KJV "Woe to him that coveteth an evil covetousness to his house"
NIV: "Woe to him who builds his house by unjust gain"
Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
הוֹי בֹּצֵעַ בֶּצַע רָע לְבֵיתוֹ
KJV "Woe to him that coveteth an evil covetousness to his house"
NIV: "Woe to him who builds his house by unjust gain"
Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
Isaac Fried wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 10:24 am Notice that in Habakkuk 2:9 it is בֶּצַע רָע
הוֹי בֹּצֵעַ בֶּצַע רָע לְבֵיתוֹ
KJV "Woe to him that coveteth an evil covetousness to his house"
NIV: "Woe to him who builds his house by unjust gain"
Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
Absolutely. Especially when it was just mentioned in the previous phrase. No one would miss that.Refael Shalev wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:57 am יקח contains the subject and the action like לקחתי/תיקח etc.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
-
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 12:07 pm
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
Isaac,
Is this observation make any difference?
Is this observation make any difference?
Refael Shalev
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
In Proverbs 1:19 בֹּצֵעַ בָּצַע is a סמיכות, or a single compounded noun, and hence possibly the qametz.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
- Jason Hare
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
- Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
- Contact:
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
בָּ֫צַע is the object of בֹּצֵעַ, and it has the qamats as a result of it being in pause (marked with the etnaḥta: כָּל־בֹּ֣צֵֽעַ בָּ֑צַע).Isaac Fried wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 5:59 pm In Proverbs 1:19 בֹּצֵעַ בָּצַע is a סמיכות, or a single compounded noun, and hence possibly the qametz.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
-
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
I think that the subject of יקח is not the noun בצע but the participle בצע (the criminal)
I think it fits better in any aspect.
I think it fits better in any aspect.
David Hunter
-
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 12:07 pm
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
Hi David,
According to the prior verses the sinners lark to the innocent but actually they set a trap to their souls, as well as all who takes unjust profit-that action will take their soul.
In my opinion I think that pointing just the sin is better some verses before this verse. In it's actual location the author concentrates in the aftermath.
According to the prior verses the sinners lark to the innocent but actually they set a trap to their souls, as well as all who takes unjust profit-that action will take their soul.
In my opinion I think that pointing just the sin is better some verses before this verse. In it's actual location the author concentrates in the aftermath.
Refael Shalev
-
- Posts: 1557
- Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
We had the same question concerning Daniel 9:27, namely what is the antecedent to the verb? In other words, what is its subject?Refael Shalev wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:57 am Karl,
יקח contains the subject and the action like לקחתי/תיקח etc.
That the verb is at the end of the phrase is irrelevant, That is merely a matter of poetic structure.
The clause את נפש בעליו self-identifies as an object clause by the accusative marker.
The previous verses identify a gang of wicked people, without a slave owner. Then this verse closes the section as a “moral of the story”. So the verse doesn’t refer to a master/slave relationship.
So what takes the life of its master, when we don’t refer to the actor of the first phrase as a slave? Is it not then an object? Seeing as in the previous phrase that its subject is a person, the actor, that he is not the slave of the owner in the second phrase from the context, then is not the subject of the second phrase the object listed in the verse, namely the “unjust cut”? To make that clear, should not the “unjust cut” be part of the second phrase, and not the first?
The actor in the first phrase is already identified as one taking an unjust cut, so the substantive (shegolat noun) is not needed for understanding the first phrase. Why then insist that it be part of the first phrase?
To make my reading, if you want to add the points, the points indicating the pause should be on the actor, the participle that is the first בצע. Then the second בצע should be pointed as a subject of a sentence, without indications of pause.
Karl W. Randolph.
- SteveMiller
- Posts: 465
- Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
- Location: Detroit, MI, USA
- Contact:
Re: On the subject of accuracy of the masoretic vowel tradition. May be of interesting to kwrandolph
Hi Isaac,Isaac Fried wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:55 pm Unfortunately I have not seen yet not even one single example of a "corrected" niqud.
I think this is an example of a corrected nikud:
Ps 23:6b וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י בְּבֵית־יְ֜הוָ֗ה לְאֹ֣רֶךְ יָמִֽים
And I will dwell in the house of the Lord for the length of days.
The way the verb וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י is voweled, it means "and I will return", which doesn't make sense.
All translations translate it as "and I will dwell", which would be וְשִׁבְתִּי, literally "and I to dwell in the house of the Lord for the length of days."
I think it should be וְשָׁבַֽתִּי "and I will rest ...".
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)