bhebrew.biblicalhumanities.org
https://bhebrew.biblicalhumanities.org/
https://bhebrew.biblicalhumanities.org/viewtopic.php?t=22550
After a silent sheva, the begedkefet letters are hard. The presence of the dagesh demonstrates that the sheva is silent.Isaac Fried wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 11:10 am Why do you think there is a dagesh in the letter ת of וְשַׁבְתִּי of Ps. 23:6?
Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
Well, literally, "And-dwelling-mine in-house-of-YHWH to-length-of days."SteveMiller wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 9:52 pmHi 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 ...".
Conversely, I say. The begedkefet letters are hard because they happen to carry in them for some reason a dagesh.After a silent sheva, the begedkefet letters are hard. The presence of the dagesh demonstrates that the sheva is silent
"For some reason" isn't very systematic. The reasons have been laid out in all grammars of the language. It's not just some random unknown reason.Isaac Fried wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:10 pm Jason writesConversely, I say. The begedkefet letters are hard because they happen to carry in them for some reason a dagesh.After a silent sheva, the begedkefet letters are hard. The presence of the dagesh demonstrates that the sheva is silent
Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
SteveMiller wrote: Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:15 pm Thanks Jason!
Since we are on the subject of vowels, here is a question I have had for a while.
The 2ms pronoun suffix is ךָ֙, while the 2fs suffix is ךְ, differing only in vowels.
Why does the 2ms pronoun suffix often appear with the shevah rather than the qametz?
i.e.
Ps 63:7 אִם־זְכַרְתִּ֥יךָ עַל־יְצוּעָ֑י בְּ֜אַשְׁמֻר֗וֹת אֶהְגֶּה־בָּֽךְ׃
Why is the last word, bach, not bechah?
This is so common, that I don't think it could be a mistake.
Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Roma: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006), 312–313.Inflection of the prepositions (Paradigm 20). The prepositions, which are considered nouns, take the suffixes in the manner of nouns. The suffixes of the prepositions are generally those of the nouns; however, there are a fair number of exceptions, especially with the primitive prepositions. With some of these prepositions, in the 2nd f. sing. and the 1st pl., we have ◌ָ instead of the ◌ֵ of the noun. In the 2nd f. sg. we have לָךְ (primitive form la, § b), which contrasts with סוּסֵךְ and (prob. on the analogy of לָךְ) בָּךְ, עִמָּךְ, אִתָּךְ, אֹתָךְ (cf. הִנָּךְ and עוֹדָךְ, § 102k); but we have מִמֵּךְ and בֵּינֵךְ (אֵינֵךְ § 102k). The pausal form of the 2nd m. also takes ◌ָ֑ךְ (בָּ֑ךְ, לָ֑ךְ, עִמָּ֑ךְ, אִתָּ֑ךְ, אֹתָ֑ךְ) whilst in the noun it takes ◌ֶ֑ךָ (on the analogy of ל״ה nouns, § 94c). In the 1st pl., unlike סוּסֵ֫נוּ, we find לָ֫נוּ and (probably on the analogy of לָ֫נוּ) בָּ֫נוּ, עִמָּ֫נוּ, אִתָּ֫נוּ, אֹתָ֫נוּ; but we also find מִמֶּ֫נּוּ (הִנֵּ֑נוּ, הִנֶּ֫נּוּ, הִנְנוּ). In the 3rd pl. the prepositions generally have the suffix ◌ָם like the nouns (סוּסָם); but a number of prepositions take, either exclusively or alternatively, the suffix ◌ְהֶם. We find בָּהֶם, בָּם (both in a single verse, Lv 11.43); לָהֶם; כָּהֵם (ṣeré, § c, 3rd n.); עִמָּהֶם, עִמָּם; אֶתְהֶם occurs less often than אֹתָם.
The begedkefet distribution is random. In Gen. 2:3 we read שָׁבַת shavat, but in Ex. 16:25 we read שַׁבָּת shabat."For some reason" isn't very systematic. The reasons have been laid out in all grammars of the language. It's not just some random unknown reason.
That isn't random at all. The dagesh in שַׁבָּת šabbāṯ is dagesh forte (דגש חזק). It is part of the noun pattern (like גַּנָּן gannān and קַשָּׁת qaššāṯ). There's nothing random about it. The pattern here is CaCCāC (where C is a consonant, a is pataḥ, and ā is kamats). By this right, the same pattern is filled by words like רַקְדָּן raqdān, in which the two internal consonants (CC) are not the same letter.Isaac Fried wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 2:56 pm The begedkefet distribution is random. In Gen. 2:3 we read שָׁבַת shavat, but in Ex. 16:25 we read שַׁבָּת shabat.
There is no such thing as a dagesh being "clearly part of the noun". Whatever is in the noun is "clearly part of the noun".The dagesh is clearly part of the noun