Maqqef vs inseparable, and choices in pronouns

[Jason Hare]

Thanks Jason, I see now that I was ignoring your point about vowel length. I see now that the more refined question is what maqaf marks need to be retained in order to still obey the rules of Biblical Hebrew. In this sense perhaps maqaf straddles the vocalization and cantillation systems, providing an example of how these systems cannot easily be separated.

I.e., some maqaf marks are presumably "just for cantillation," i.e., they can be dropped without forming "illegal" words. But some cannot just be dropped thusly.

Absolutely. Consider what happens to the word את when you drop makaf. If it is connected, the word is pointed with segol (short vowel). If it is unconnected, the word is pointed with tsere (long vowel). For example, compare Gen 1:1 (אֵת הַשָּׁמַ֫יִם וְאֵת הָאָ֫רֶץ) with Gen 1:4 (וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאוֹר). When not utilizing makaf, you should point all instances of את with tsere, technically. Dropping makaf would change יִשְׁמָר־לָ֫נוּ in Jer 5:14 to יִשְׁמֹר לָ֫נוּ, since you cannot maintain the short vowel (kamats katan) in ישמר in an accented syllable. The makaf does play a part in how we point words.

[Ben Putnam]

What about maqqef in cases where the vowel often remains the same regardless of the maqqef or lack thereof, like with הִנֵּה־ versus הִנֵּה? Thinking of composition / language production here. Does this just depend on how one chooses to emphasize the statement, whether with a slight pause or no pause? Could either וְהִנֵּה־טוֹב מְאֹד or וְהִנֵּה טוֹב מְאֹד be used, just depending on prosodic choices by the writer? I notice Genesis 1:31 has וְהִנֵּה־טוֹב מְאֹד, while Judges 18:9 has וְהִנֵּה טוֹבָה מְאֹד.

[Jason Hare]

Think of the heh as leaving the syllable, it standing as a vowel letter.