1. You should get yourself the two very useful booklets ד"ר שאול ברקלי, לוח הפעלים השלם ד"ר שאול ברקלי, לוח השמות השלם
2. This is the common wisdom explanation: that the dagesh in the G of XOGU, 'celebrate', is to show that this G is one for two. In Na. 2:1 we find XAGIY חָגִּי with a qamac under the X and still a dagesh in the G. In Ex. 12:14 it is TXAGUHU תְּחָגֻּהוּ also with a qamac. In Ps. 107:27 we find YAXOGU יָחוֹגּוּ in the sense of reel, written with a "full" xolam, yet still with a dagesh in the G. In Gen. 8:1 we find VA-YA$OK-U וַיָּשֹׁכּוּ with a patax in the V, a dagesh in the Y, and another dagesh in the K. Here too, the common wisdom explanation is that the dagesh in this K is to show that it is one for two. I can not bring myself to believe that a dot was inserted into the bosom of the Hebrew letter K just to inform us that a second one is hiding under the first. For what? 3. Do you mean in SHORSHI, TABNITIY? Isaac Fried, Boston University On May 17, 2011, at 4:35 PM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. wrote: > isaac, > > >>> But there are exceptions: there is a dagesh in the G of XOGU, > following a xolam. > > can you send me the reference? clearly if it comes from XGG then, > from my point of view, > a dagesh on the G is required! if it comes from XWG then i cannot > explain it. > > >>> We see that a dagesh follows HA-, yet it is absent in HA-MDABR- > IYM הַמְדַבְּרִים of Ex.6:27. Why? > > maybe the second dagesh forte is the reason why the first dagesh > forte was removed. > just for the argument, let's assume dagesh forte did signal > consonant gemination. then it would be difficult > to maintain BOTH geminations in sequence for reasons of meter, in > HAMEDABRIM. try it! > > now, since the second dagesh is SHORSHI, the first dagesh is > sacrificed. > > voila... > > nir cohen _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
