NOTICE: This message, including all attachments transmitted with it, is for
the use of the addressee only. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or
lost by any mistransmission. If you believe you have received this message
in error, please delete it and all copies of it from your system and notify
the sender immediately by reply e-mail. Thank you.
At 14:01 21-08-11 -0400, Hayyim Obadyah stated the following:
can anyone tell me what is meant by the term =F9=E5=E5=E0 =E2=F8=E5=E3=
(shewa gerud)?
thanks
At the risk of being far off-base, I wonder if=20
the word is not "shav" rather than "sheva," and=20
therefore the meaning is not a Mesorah-type of term.
~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D
IRA L. JACOBSON
=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~ mailto:laser@ieee.org
Quote of the Week:
"The real opponents of Zionism can never be=20
placated by any diplomatic formula: their=20
objection to the Jews is that the Jews exist, and=20
in this particular case, they exist in Palestine ."
-Chaim Weizmann, Israel's first President.
<html>
<body>
<font color=3D"#000080"><i>At 14:01 21-08-11 -0400, Hayyim Obadyah stated
the following:<br><br>
</i></font><blockquote type=3Dcite class=3Dcite cite=3D"">can anyone tell me
what is meant by the term <font face=3D"David" size=3D4>=F9=E5=E5=E0 =E2=F8=
=E5=E3</font>
(shewa gerud)?<br>
thanks</blockquote><font color=3D"#000080"><br>
At the risk of being far off-base, I wonder if the word is not
"shav" rather than "sheva," and therefore the meaning
is not a Mesorah-type of term.<br><br>
<br><br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<i>~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D<br>
IRA L. JACOBSON<br>
</i>=3D<i>~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~=3D~<br>
</font><a href=3D"mailto:laser@ieee.org" eudora=3D"autourl"> mailto:laser@ieee.org</a></i> <br><br>
<font face=3D"Calibri"><b>Quote of the Week:<br>
</b>"The real opponents of Zionism can never be placated by any
diplomatic formula: their objection to the Jews is that the Jews exist,
and in this particular case, they exist in Palestine ." <br>
-Chaim Weizmann, Israel's first President.<br>
</font></body>
</html>
the expression is used by A. Dotan in explaining a paragraph in Diqduqei
hatTe`amim about a shewa under the first of two identical consonants, so Im
pretty sure its a masora question.
ההגייה בפתיחת הפה היא ביצוע תנועתי של השווא, נהעתו. הלכות הגייתו של השווא הנע באותה תקופה ידועים לנו ממקורות רצים ולפיהן אפשר לו לשווא שייהגה במצב זה, בעיצורים זהים רצופים שבתוך התיבה, רק בתנועת . מאחר שהגורמיםל הגייה אחרת נעדרים, כלומר, אי אפשר להם לשני יוגי"ם או לשני עיצורים גרוניים, כשהם רצופים בתוך התיבה, לבוא בניקוד שווא גרוד. אם צריכים אנו ראיה לכך (ואין אנו צריכים!), אבואו ויעידו כתבי-יד רבים של מקרא ושל דקה"ט ומרעיו, שיש במם חטף פתח במקום השווא הגרוד שאחר הגיעה.
3. The pronunciation of “opening the mouth” is the vocalic execution of the shewa as mobile. The laws of pronunciation of shewa na` in that period are known to us from many sources and according to them it is possible for the shewa to be pronounced in this situation with contiguous identical consonants within a word, only with an “a” vowel, after the causes of another pronunciation have been eliminated, such as, it is impossible for two yōdhs or two guttural consonants that are contiguous to be vocalized with ??? [שווא גרוד]. If we need proof of this (although we do not need it!), many manuscripts of Bible and of Diqduqei hatTe`amim and similar documents testify to it, in that they have ḥāṭēph-pathaḥ instead of the ??? [שווא גרוד] after the gaʿyāʾ.