Re: Possible proposal for new Hebrew accent character

Date: Mon Dec 09 2002 - 11:21:08 EST

  • Next message: "Re: Leningrad NOT most reliable, opinions differ"


    I've got Revell's translation of Yeivin, and it doesn't mention "etnah
    hafukh". (Perhaps Breuer was reading the Hebrew original and the term was
    omitted in the translation.)

    In the translation of Yeivin, section #361, it says,

    "Oleh we-yored has only one servus [preceding conjunctive accent]. In the
    MSS [manuscripts], this characteristic servus is marked by a "v" shaped
    sign marked under the stress [sic] syllable. In later MSS this is confused
    with galgal, the servus of pazer, so that the servus of oleh we-yored has
    the same semi-circular form as the servus of pazer. The extent to which the
    angular form of the servus of oleh we-yored is distinguished from the
    semi-circular form of the servus of pazer serves as an indicator of the
    accuracy and purity of the tradition of the accentuation in a manuscript."

    This seems to suggest, then, that an additional, distinct accent is needed.

    What I don't understand, however, is why BHS doesn't reflect this: if BHS
    is based on the Leningrad Codex, which is considered the most reliable
    examplar of the ben Asher tradition, and if the ben Asher tradition is
    considered the most reliable, and if (per Yeivin) the distinction between
    the servus of ole we-yored and that of pazer reflects on the "accuracy and
    purity" of the source, then I'd expect this distinction to be reflected in
    the Leningrad Codex and, hence, in BHS. This doesn't invalidate Yeivin's
    comments, however.

    If Yeivin is correct (and I have no reason to presume otherwise), then
    presumably there should be a manuscript that shows both, potentially in
    close proximity. If someone can come up with a digitised sample from such a
    manuscript, a proposal should be relatively straight forward.

    - Peter

    Peter Constable

    Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    Tel: +1 972 708 7485

    On 12/08/2002 12:24:12 PM "Mark E. Shoulson" wrote:

    >I don't have access to Yeivin at the moment, but according to Breuer,
    >who references Yeivin as his source... wait, I'll quote/translate from
    > "... The printers equated the shape of the Galgal which is before a
    >Pazer to the shape of this
    > 'servant' [conjunctive accent -- "this" one being the Etnah Hafukh],
    >which comes before
    > an Ole-V'Yored. As a result, the nature of this accent as a
    >conjuctive in its own right has
    > been forgotten; later experts said that the Galgal serves both the
    >Pazer and the
    > Ole-V'Yored. But the shape of the servant of the Ole-V'Yored in the
    > ([picture showing it: a V-shape under the letter]) is different from
    >the servant of the
    > Pazer ([picture showing it: semicircle open at top with small stem
    >at bottom]); and
    > hence these are two 'servants'. This matter was revealed by Yisrael
    >Yeivin, and he it
    > was that called the servant of the Ole-V'Yored an Etnah Hafukh."
    >So the best I can give you is second- or third-hand. Breuer says that
    >the manuscripts use them constrastively, but I cannot say I've seen it
    >with my own eyes, nor send you a scan.
    >by way of Michael Everson wrote:
    >> On 11/28/2002 06:05:27 AM Julian Gilbey wrote:
    >>> I'd like to ask for people's advice before submitting a proposal.
    >>> In the Hebrew part of Unicode, there are a range of positions
    >>> allocated to Biblical accents (U0591-U05AE). In particular, one of
    >>> them is:
    >>> with a note "= galgal".
    >>> Now, from my recent studies in the field, it appears that in the books
    >>> of Psalms, Proverbs and Job, which use a different accentuation system
    >>> from the rest of the Bible (Old Testament), there are two similar
    >>> accents which are often printed in the same way, but which were
    >>> clearly distinguished and written differently in the early
    >>> manuscripts. One is usually called the GALGAL, the other is called
    >>> ETNAH HAFUKH. (I don't recall offhand which one is the same symbol as
    >>> the YERAH BEN YOMO.)
    >>> Would it be reasonable to propose the addition of a new accent symbol
    >>> ETNAH HAFUKH (or GALGAL, with the note attached to YERAH BEN YOMO
    >>> changed to "= etnah hafukh")?
    >> It would be helpful to see some visual samples. In the sources I have
    >> access to, I haven't come across any references to "etnah hafukh"
    >> I'm just getting into these, so may well have missed something that's
    >> there), so I'm not sure what it is or what it looks like. Yeivin
    >> (Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah) mentions two shapes for galgal, a
    >> semi-circle open on top used in manuscripts, and a "v" shape used in
    >> printed texts. Are these the two accents you're referring to? If so, are
    >> both used contrastively in MSS (e.g. both used in close proximity in a
    >> single mss)?
    >> If there's a distinct character out there, it's always possible to add
    >> it.
    >> We just need enough info making clear what's needed.
    >> - Peter
    >> Peter Constable
    >> Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    >> 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    >> Tel: +1 972 708 7485

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 09 2002 - 13:27:59 EST