From: Peter Kirk (peter.r.kirk@ntlworld.com)
Date: Wed Jul 09 2003 - 05:49:49 EDT
On 08/07/2003 22:55, John Hudson wrote:
> In no case are the secondary vowels simply 'squeezed between'; correct
> rendering always requires mark positioning. Consider the example cited
> by Peter Kirk from Exodus 20:4, 10th word, in which you have the
> sequence <qamats, etnahta, patah> following tav. This is correctly
> rendered with the sequence of three marks centered under the tav.
This example is in fact different from ALL of the others mentioned in
the last few days. Here, uniquely, the two vowels qamats and patah are
indeed both related to the consonant tav, as alternative (rather than
successive) vowel sounds. In the other cases you will, in general and
depending in detail on the edition, see that the first vowel of the
sequence is centred under the consonant, and the second one is displaced
to the left, more nearly under the narrow space between the consonants,
e.g. as you say "a secondary vowel on the line where the left
sidebearing of the lamed hits the right sidebearing of the mem".
-- Peter Kirk peter.r.kirk@ntlworld.com http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 09 2003 - 06:36:43 EDT