Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Discussion must focus on the Hebrew text (including text criticism) and its ancient translations, not on archaeology, modern language translations, or theological controversies.
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
cvkimball
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:11 pm
Location: West Redding, CT USA
Contact:

Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by cvkimball »

Ben Denckla has proposed 4 changes to the UXLC text at https://tanach.us/Tanach.xml. The changes are in the two Decalogues and involve marks (vowels, accents) in the Lower / Upper systems.

1, 3: Ex20:3.7, Deut 5:7.7 - Move patah to preceding nun.

2, 4: Ex20:10.1, Deut 5:14.1 - Change pashta to qadma on yod.

The proposed changes are detailed at:

https://tanach.us/Changes/Proposed%20ch ... hanges.xml

Your comments on these changes will improve the text.

Chris Kimball
West Redding, CT
USA
ducky
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by ducky »

Hi Chris,

The verses in the ten commandments have two ways of "cutting", therefore, there are two sets of cantillations on the words, (and also vowels).

The first note - about the Patah - is right.
The Patah' and the Qamats (together) should be under the letter N (of פני).


As for the cantillations,
It should stay that way.
the two sets represent the two ways:

1.
וְיוֹם֙ הַשְּׁבִיעִ֔י שַׁבָּ֖ת לַֽ־ה֣ אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ
2.
וְי֨וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֜י שַׁבָּ֣ת לַֽ־ה֣ אֱלֹהֶ֗יך
David Hunter
cvkimball
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:11 pm
Location: West Redding, CT USA
Contact:

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by cvkimball »

Thanks!

How about Ex 20:10.1 - Deut 5:14.1?

Chris Kimball
West Redding, CT
USA
ducky
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by ducky »

Hi Chris,

I wrote that in the second part of my post above.

I wrote the same verse twice with different cantillation marks.

In the Bible, the verse is written once of course, and so, the verse accepts both of them at once.

And so, the first word in the verse (יום) would get also the sign above the letter Yod and also the sign above (and at the end of) the letter Mem.

****
Maybe you can reach this guy and ask him to give you more details of why he thinks you should change it.
I don't see it should be changed but maybe I didn't understand his position.
David Hunter
cvkimball
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:11 pm
Location: West Redding, CT USA
Contact:

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by cvkimball »

Sorry, I missed the purpose of the second part. It's very clear there are two accents on Ex 20:10.1, the question at hqadmaand is whether the first should be a qadma instead of a pashta. They're impossible to distinguish visually.

Ben Denckla says:

"This coding error is an easy mistake to make because pashta does often occur twice in a word, once in its
“real” post-positive location and once in a “helper” location to indicate which non-final syllable is the
stressed syllable, i.e. to indicate which non-final syllable the trope melody is “centered” on.
But that doubled pashta usage makes no sense here because the “helper” on yod would be indicating the
final syllable, which is already the default stressed syllable for this trope. I.e. the “helper” is only needed to
mark a non-final syllable as stressed."

Please contact him directly at bdenckla@alum.mit.edu and share the results of the conversation with us.

Chris
ducky
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by ducky »

Hi Chris,

Unfortunately, I don't have the time (or the will, to be honest) to start talking with someone about this.

Anyway, Once again, My answer is the same one that I gave in my first post.

His note to you claims that the two signs on the word ויום represent a double Pashta. But they are not.

My first post comes to say that the one sign of the word has nothing to do with the second sign on the word.
These are two signs which each one belongs to another set.

There are two ways that this verse got its cantillation marks:

1. וְיוֹם֙ הַשְּׁבִיעִ֔י שַׁבָּ֖ת לַֽ־ה֣ אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ
Here, you can see that the first word only has one sign (above letter M)

2. וְי֨וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֜י שַׁבָּ֣ת לַֽ־ה֣ אֱלֹהֶ֗יךָ
Here, you can see that the first word only has one sign (above letter Y)

So we see here, that each sign has his own "playground".
(like, btw, any other word in this verse).

So now, when I want to write the verse only once, I put all of the signs from the two sets to the one verse.

And so, each word gets two different signs together while each one has its own "playground" - and one has nothing to do with the other.

And so is the word ויום
One sign is linked to the one sign of the next word - השביעי
and the other sign is linked to the other sign of the next word - השביעי

And so, these two signs on the word ויום do not play on the same playground at all, and there is no point to look at them together and say that there is a double Pashta.
David Hunter
cvkimball
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:11 pm
Location: West Redding, CT USA
Contact:

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by cvkimball »

The current accents are two pashtas. The proposed change is to change the mark over the yod from a pashta to a qadma.
ducky
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by ducky »

Hi Chris,

Yes. It should be Qadma.
(like in the second set that I wrote above).
David Hunter
cvkimball
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:11 pm
Location: West Redding, CT USA
Contact:

Re: Unicode/XML Leningrad Codex - Proposed Changes, 7 Jun 2020

Post by cvkimball »

Thanks, Ducky!
Post Reply