tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post5327560248579764666..comments2023-10-06T15:01:30.680-04:00Comments on The Dikdukian: Hearing LosShtiklerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07498936768989355610noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-78111250953554093992015-05-17T09:57:50.251-04:002015-05-17T09:57:50.251-04:00There is perhaps another example of a "kri&qu...There is perhaps another example of a "kri" feature that (I think) has no actual effect on pronunciation. According to the Masorah in parshas Emor 23:17 there are 4 places in Tanach where we find an Aleph with a dagesh. Is there a way to make an Aleph more pronounced? This seems to indicate that the nekudos are more than simply guides to pronunciation. Perhaps the same can be said regarding the Kri/Ksivs.Meirnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-39249875606319788912013-05-06T16:45:26.376-04:002013-05-06T16:45:26.376-04:00I used Davka's Tanach library which is part of...I used Davka's Tanach library which is part of their DavkaWriter software. I remember it being a bit tedious, but I was unaware of another program.Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-74724950801159619202013-05-06T11:28:17.840-04:002013-05-06T11:28:17.840-04:00Maybe off topic: WHic software has the ability to ...Maybe off topic: WHic software has the ability to search for trop?<br />Thanks.Rabbi Hirsch Meiselshttp://www.friendswithdiabetes.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-31731127799002547452011-12-08T13:26:07.702-05:002011-12-08T13:26:07.702-05:00That is certainly a nice theory that would answer ...That is certainly a nice theory that would answer the question in the post. However, I don't see how one can PROVE that there is a different pronunciation, though. I assume Rav Yaakov zt"l somehow first proves the theory and then suggests that it would resolve this issue. The fact that it resolves the issue doesn't prove that the assertion is correct. Do you happen to know where this is written?Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-44101695440674783302011-12-08T13:10:27.348-05:002011-12-08T13:10:27.348-05:00I heard that Reb Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l prove...I heard that Reb Yaakov Kamenetsky zt"l proved from the lo/lo kri and ksiv that lo with a vav was once pronounced "low" with a final w sound, whereas lo with an aleph did not have that w sound.Yirmiyahunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-40588098931618242002011-05-23T09:30:50.796-04:002011-05-23T09:30:50.796-04:00If the aleph had a glottal stop, we would expect a...If the aleph had a glottal stop, we would expect all BGT KPT words that follow words with an aleph (of a nach nistar, like the word lo-alpeh) to take a dagesh kal, as we find with mapik heh. Since they don't, there is clearly not an "implied" shva nach under the aleph.<br />Also, see the Torah Temimah on this posuk who seems to say that the kri/kesiv is in fact a matter of the baal kriah's intent.MGnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-67157922281697735732011-05-22T20:34:21.058-04:002011-05-22T20:34:21.058-04:00I also apologize for not having seen the newer pos...I also apologize for not having seen the newer posts, somehow google lost the blog and the original posts, although they all seem to be back now.Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-45819423231645000852011-05-22T20:33:19.756-04:002011-05-22T20:33:19.756-04:00Possibly, but we find that the Tanaic sources do n...Possibly, but we find that the Tanaic sources do not differentiate in the pronunciation of aleph or vav. An example of this is the famous Midrash that contends that at Sinai the people needed to see the letters of the words spoken in order to know that Hashem was instructing them not to murder as opposed to telling them to murder "him" (meaning the person standing beside them). As far asMG's comment, it is disproportionate on most all the trop so it seems there is something happening. There is not one of the trop that has a close amount of alephs and vavs and the differences are staggering on all.Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-21513121976415970982011-05-22T20:04:34.176-04:002011-05-22T20:04:34.176-04:00Perhaps the aleph is not an em-qri'a, but shou...Perhaps the aleph is not an em-qri'a, but should be pronounced (as a glottal stop)? Tricky, but not impossible. Then the absence of the aleph-sound would indicate a qri of lo-vav.Shlomo Engelson Argamonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16362826264834676244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-4496936140331240962011-05-12T15:36:44.504-04:002011-05-12T15:36:44.504-04:00Yes, that was interesting... however, keep in mind...Yes, that was interesting... however, keep in mind that lo-aleph must typically be found on a mesharet, as it is connected to the next word. This is almost always the case, except where the posuk doesn't allow anything but a melech for technical reasons(i.e. "Lo Tignovu" in Kedoshim must have a tipcha) or when the last word in a phrase is Lo (i.e. "Vayomer Lo" in Balak). So the pattern you describe is expected. You would have to toss out etnachta, sof pasuk, and occurences of tipcha in two word phrases (in fact I would bet that every occurence of tipcha you find with lo-aleph is a two word phrase), and then all you are left with are meshartim.<br />My point is it's not a general statement about kri/ketiv and how that relates to trup or whether or not Biblical Hebrew is tonal but that certain words are "mesharet words" and usually take a mesharet, and others (like "Elokim") usually take a melech. Lo-vav would fit into that category.MGnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-32601788173120447592011-05-12T14:13:00.946-04:002011-05-12T14:13:00.946-04:00Point taken, although most other kri/ksivs would b...Point taken, although most other kri/ksivs would be different. The big thing that I found astounding was that the data supported the trop as a function of the written word and that most los of any kind fit a specific trop pattern that the others do not.Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-53069167299137475862011-05-12T13:39:55.839-04:002011-05-12T13:39:55.839-04:00I'm saying it has nothing to do with the perso...I'm saying it has nothing to do with the person hearing it. The Torah "wrote" the word "no", but it wants to convey "yes". So we have a Mesorah that it is to be "read" with a vav. Nothing to do with proununciation. If you were the Torah, how would you do it? How would you hint to people to darshen "yes" without any clues, if you wrote explicitly, "no"?<br />The kri/kesiv device is perfect.<br /><br />Obviously the Torah could have written it with a vav...but as Shtickler notes, and is indicated in Rashi, there is a double entendre here. Had the Torah written vav, we wouldn't know to include a wall was once thre but no longer is standing.<br /><br />Your objection that this falls into the category of drash might be valid; I'm only suggesting that we need to expand the definition of kri/kesiv.MGnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-20747754694082754082011-05-12T12:48:06.391-04:002011-05-12T12:48:06.391-04:00That is very nice in the way of homiletics, but re...That is very nice in the way of homiletics, but realistically the person hearing it could hear it either way. Keep in mind the famous Midrash that says that the words of the Aseres HaDibros were visible to the people and not just audible when Hashem gave them. Otherwise people may have thought lo tirzach (or sirtzach depending on taam elyon or not) meant murder him and not do not murder.Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-60840699661367855732011-05-12T12:27:13.261-04:002011-05-12T12:27:13.261-04:00I'm not following 100% but perhaps what I post...I'm not following 100% but perhaps <a href="http://dikdukian.weeklyshtikle.com/2011/05/how-lo-can-you-go.html" rel="nofollow">what I posted a few minutes ago</a> might shed light on what MG is trying to get at:Shtiklerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498936768989355610noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-75354501581541845462011-05-12T12:17:30.118-04:002011-05-12T12:17:30.118-04:00I apologize, I thought you meant reader intent. Wh...I apologize, I thought you meant reader intent. What would scriptural intent mean? To give a double meaning? Wouldn't the terminology kri be extremely misleading? The word drush or some other reference word would be more fitting. Also, the fact that most kri/ksivs are differences between the written word (ksiv) and the way it is sounded/read (kri) wouldn't it seem that that is a major factor.Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-24377228976895193272011-05-12T11:53:58.690-04:002011-05-12T11:53:58.690-04:00I'm sorry if I missed something, but I don'...I'm sorry if I missed something, but I don't see where you address this. You say you're not 100% sure how to pronounce the word; then you suggest that reader intent comes into play.<br />I'm saying that pronunciation and reader intent are irrelevent, and that kri has everything to do with scriptural intent, not actual pronunciation.<br />Again, apologies if I missed something in the piece.MGnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-55222966782858484282011-05-12T10:58:27.733-04:002011-05-12T10:58:27.733-04:00Thank you. If you look at the end of the post, I a...Thank you. If you look at the end of the post, I addressed that.Ari S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15688549063544341675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866132022161856151.post-60245053616695471792011-05-12T10:06:12.351-04:002011-05-12T10:06:12.351-04:00Excellent piece.
But you assume "kri" is...Excellent piece.<br />But you assume "kri" is only about pronunciation. It's also, perhaps primarily, about interpretation. How else would we know that "lo" in Behar means "his" rather than "not"? The "kri" tells us so. True, they are (we think) physically pronounced the same; there's no way to correct the koreh.MGnoreply@blogger.com