Tell me more ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote -1 down vote favorite

What is the reason for the patach under the vuv in וַיִּקְרָא ?

I would expect a schva.

share|improve this question
4  
Can you edit in why you would expect a shva? – Double AA♦ Jun 4 '12 at 0:40
@msh210 Is this even in scope? – Double AA♦ Jun 4 '12 at 7:07
@DoubleAA IMO no. (See an answer on the meta site, and that answer's comments.) I doubt it will get much further activity though, since it has a very nice answer and there's AFAIK no other correct answer, so no rush to close it AFAICT. I'll wait and see what others think thereforebefore closing it. – msh210♦ Jun 4 '12 at 7:09
@DoubleAA, I agree with Seth J that just a little bit of Jewish-Learning-oriented motivation edited into the question (as you request) would make it in-scope. – Isaac Moses Jun 4 '12 at 15:11
No dissenting opinions, so closing. Ping me @DoubleAA if anything changes. – Double AA♦ Sep 23 '12 at 7:33

closed as off topic by Gershon Gold, Double AA♦ Sep 23 '12 at 7:33

Questions on Mi Yodeya are expected to relate to Judaism within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

1 Answer

up vote 8 down vote accepted

This is the standard "Vav ha-hipuch" of Biblical grammar, which reverses the future tense to the past.

"Yikra" == "he will call."

"Ve-yikra" == "and he will call."

"VA-yikra" == "[and] he called."

(It's actually unclear whether the vav hahipuch also functions as an "and." Most translators include the "and", though Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's Living Torah doesn't.)

share|improve this answer
Perfect answer, as this question teetered, IMHO, on being off-topic as a Hebrew grammar question, albeit biblical. Your tying it to a mainstream religious text brought back from the brink. – Seth J Jun 4 '12 at 1:19
I understand your comment regarding the relevance of this question to the aims of this website. However, I do not know of a better forum for a question like this. This includes this site's constitution of Torah Observant Jews that contribute with an accuracy that is not to be found anywhere on the web. If I am in error in such reasoning, please share. – EEE Jun 4 '12 at 2:21
I agree with EEE about why this question is relevent and appropriate here. But in addition EEE's reasoning that this site is one of the best forums available for Torah obsernat Jews, I feel that questions about Hebrew grammar in Tanach and liturgy are automatically appropriate because, as Shalom's answer demonstrates, understanding grammar is essential to understanding Tanach and liturgy. – Shemmy Jun 4 '12 at 11:07
1  
@Seth -- When you say that Shalom was able to tie his answer to a "mainstream religious text" I assume you are refering to Tanach. Just to be clear: I'm a huge fan of Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, but this question concerns grammar that is necessary to know in order to understand Tanach itself. I fail to see why some people felt it was teetering on the brink of being off-topic. Why would someone think that understanding Tanach is off-topic in this forum? – Shemmy Jun 4 '12 at 11:12
2  
And @EEE, no offense intended. A simple edit to demonstrate why, as a religious person, this concerned you, would have made it more obviously in scope. (Ie., Does this Pataḥ change the meaning of the Pasuk? Is it addressed by any commentators?) The Vav HaHipuch is a signature grammatical feature of the Torah. If you are just curious about the vowel, though, it seems like a grammar question more than anything else. Just my opinion, but I think others have shown that they agree with me. – Seth J Jun 4 '12 at 14:00
show 3 more comments

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.