Sunday, July 19, 2020

To afflict or to answer

כָּל נֵדֶר וְכָל שְׁבֻעַת אִסָּר לְעַנֹּת נָפֶשׁ

Of course, one should not get too distracted with all the מפיק ה's that they miss the important nuance in this פסוק. An erroneous פתח under the ל would change the meaning of the word from that of affliction to that of answering. En garde!

[Also, it is best to stress the דגש חזק in the נו"ן for the same reason as per the anonymous comment below.]


Anonymous said...

Likewise, one should stress the dagesh chazak in the nun; same reason.

Shtikler said...

I was thinking about that but chose to leave it out seeing as the דגש חזק is not something the average בעל קריאה is necessarily attuned to. But that does lead to the question which I think I have asked before: if there are two components of the word - be it two pronunciations or one and a trop issue - which determine the meaning of the word, what if you get one right and one wrong?

leo said...

I think the original comment is incorrect.

The lamed's nikud does not at all determine the word's binyan. It's the shva and rafa or patach and dagesh which determine if it's kal or kaved. The lamed's nekudah which by default is shva is changed to patach before shva/chataf but won't change the binyan.

leo said...

Unless it will change to hif'il as in לשמיד (Isaiah 23:11) לשמיע לנפילetc.. But that's not the case with our word where there's no chirik for hif'IL.