Indeed, the fact of the matter is that a dagesh "forte" is routinely
found ("as expected") following a patax, a xiriq, and a qubuc
(occasionally also a segol), but not:
1. if the following letter is a "guttural"
2. if the following letter is marked by a schwa
3. a dagesh "forte" is also missing (in my opinion superfluous) in
"full" or plene writhing, thus CIPOR (sans yod), 'bird' is with a
dagesh in the letter P, but KIYTOR (with a yod), 'steam, vapor', is
with no dagesgh
If the letter following a patax, a xiriq, or a qubuc is marked by a
schwa, then the dagesh "moves" forward and nestles itself in the next
letter. Such a "postponed" dagesh we term "lene". It is conceivable
that the dagesh "lene" used to appear, as the dagesh "forte" does, in
most letters, but now we find it only in the BGDKPT letters, for
which it changes the reading.
You are right in saying that there are many instances of a letter
marked by schwa, yet still with a dagesh in it. Or, instances of a
missing dagesh "lene". In my opinion it has all to do with the fact
that the dagesh is an earlier reading prop, and is not part of the
nikud.
If dagesh appears in a letter marked by a schwa, then no second
"lene" dagesh is needed. A dagesh in a letter marked by a schwa is
routine after HA- and MI-. Notice: MIDBAR, 'desert, saying', with no
dagesh in the D, but a dagesh in the B (causing us to read it as an
English B), yet MIDVAR, 'from DVAR', as in Ex. 23:7, with (with!) a
dagesh in the D, but with no dagesh in the the letter Beth, causing
us to read it is a the English V.
I see no dagesh in SL)Y סַלְעִי 'my rock', of 2S 22:2, nor in
MQLY מַקְלִי 'my rod', of Zc 11:10 and 11:14. See here
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/t/t0.htm
In Hos. 7:5 is see MALKENU with a dagesh in the letter K, yet in Hos.
7:7 it is the notorious MALKEYHEM with no dagesh in the letter K.
Farther, in Hos. 7:8 I see UGA עֻגָה 'cake', with a qubuc under
the letter Ayin, but with no dagesh in the letter G "as expected".
Today we write עוּגה in full.
It is indeed as you say: L$LXNW לְשַׁלְּחֵנוּ 'to send us
away', of Ex 13:15, and &MXNW שַׂמְּחֵנוּ 'gladden us', of
Ps 90:15 with a dagesh in the letters L, and M, respectively.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On May 17, 2011, at 1:23 AM, Pere Porta wrote:
> To our friend Isaac Fried.
>
> You often claim that after a patah one finds dagesh "*as
> expected*" (in your
> words).
> I see that many words having patah are, indeed, followed by dagesh.
> And so,
>
> -L$LXNW, to send us away (Ex 13:15)
> -&MXNW, (you, male) gladden us! (Ps 90:15)
> and many other.
>
> But I remark too that often there is no dagesh after patah (and I
> know that
> gutturals aren't dageshed)
> And so
>
> -MLKNW, our king (Hos 7:5)
> -SL)Y, my rock (2S 22:2)
> -MQLY, my rod (Zc 11:10)
> and many other.
>
> Could you clarify your position hereon?
>
> 1. When, under which conditions a dagesh comes in the letter that
> is after a
> patah?
> 2. Are there some exceptions to the "rule" you may state?
> 3. If there are some exceptions: which these are?
>
> Kind regards from
>
> Pere Porta
> (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
>
>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Pere Porta
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
