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. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm asking according to Ashkenazi leining. The trop mark i have trouble with is the munach. It has two different sounds - a sort of "shaky" sound when it's on its own, and a sort of nothing sound when it is in the middle of a sequence.

A sequence goes like this: מהפך פשטא מנח זקף-קטן; מֵרְכָ֥א טִפְּחָ֖א מֻנַּ֣ח אֶתְנַחְתָּ֑א; מֻנַּ֣ח רְבִ֗יע.

A standalone munach looks something like: מֻנַּ֣ח | מֻנַּ֣ח רְבִ֗יע; מֻנַּ֣ח מֻנַּ֣ח פָּזֵ֡ר.

Those are all easy.

My problem is with something like this: מַהְפַּ֤ך פַּשְׁטָא֙ מֻנַּ֣ח מֻנַּ֣ח זָקֵף-קָטָ֔ן. How do you pronounce each munach? Sometimes i pronounce them both as if they are in the sequence; sometimes i'll make the first on its own and the second connected to the קטן.

How about this one? מֵרְכָ֥א מֻנַּ֣ח אֶתְנַחְתָּ֑א. That's pretty confusing for me.

Or מֻנַּ֣ח זַרְקָא֮ מֻנַּ֣ח מֻנַּ֣ח סֶגּוֹל֒?

מֻנַּ֣ח | רְבִ֗יע. Do i treat the munach as on its own, because of the psik, or is the psik just so i don't slur the words, and the trop is connected?

share|improve this question
7  
I couldn't resist: What does the Munach say? – Avram Levitt Mar 30 '14 at 11:16
    
Merkha Munach Etnachta? I don't think that's possible. Where did you see it? – Double AA Feb 12 at 4:09
    
@DoubleAA Looks like that was a mistake. QuantifiedCantillation had one occurrence in Devarim 24:10, but that seems to be an error in their source text. – Scimonster Feb 12 at 7:46
up vote 6 down vote accepted

The following is based on Chanting the Hebrew Bible by Joshua Jacobson (as well as experience leining, but note that my experience is with American and British leining; other Ashkenazim might have other minhagim).

The only time the munach gets the shaky trope is when it's a munach-legarmei, which visually looks like a munach followed by a psik. The munach-legarmei is a "טעם מפסיק" (a disjunctive trope), whereas the normal munach is a "טעם משרת" (a conjunctive trope), so it makes sense to give the shaky trope only to the munach-legarmei. See any tikkun for a list of disjunctive and conjunctive tropes.

However, there are instances where a psik (ie. a vertical line) follows a normal munach, and it is not a munach-legarmei (eg. Ruth 1:13). Except for the exceptions noted below, the rule is as follows: munach-legarmei must be followed by munach revia (occasionally, another munach-legarmei, or a geresh or darga will be in between the munach-legarmei and its munach revia); all other cases are a normal munach followed by a psik.

Exceptions: Lev 10:6, Lev 21:10, and Ruth 1:2. In place of a telisha-qetana before geresh (yet still a disjunctive): Gen 28:9, 1 Sam 14:3 (second one), 1 Sam 14:47, 2 Sam 13:32, 2 Kings 18:17, Isa 36:2, Jer 4:19, Jer 38:11, Jer 40:11, Ezek 9:2, Hag 2:12, and 2 Chron 26:15. R. Breuer's Ta'amei HaMiqra adds the following, before pazer: Neh 8:7 and Dan 3:2.

A word on the exceptions: in Lev 10:6, Lev 21:10, and Ruth 1:2, the munach is preceded by a mercha, which is not normal for the pashta which follow (we'd expect another munach), but is normal for a munach-legarmei. In Isa 36:2, the munach should be a telisha-qetana, and so it's not a normal munach (although it is a "puzzling exception in that the conjunctive appears to be munach", says Jacobson). [Jacobson's puzzle is quickly resolved upon seeing that unlike the Leningrad Codex linked to before, the Aleppo Codex has the expected mercha.] In the second set of exceptions, we expect a telisha-qetana, and thus what we have must be what Jacobson calls an upgrade (where a normally conjunctive ta'am gets replaced by a disjunctive one), and so it is munach-legarmei. In addition, in 2 Kings 18:17, we see the expected conjunctive mercha before the munach-legarmei. In Neh 8:7, we have the expected mercha. In Dan 3:2, however, it seems like it could go either way (as munach is the normal conjunctive of pazer). Jacobson quotes Breuer's Ta'amei HaMiqra, Heidenheim's Sefer Mishpetei HaTe'amim, and Perlman's HaMesorah.

As to your examples:

munach munach pazer -- will always be normal munachs, except possibly in the two exceptions listed above, Neh 8:7 and Dan 3:2.

mapach pashta munach munach zakef-qaton & munach zarka munach munach segol -- both munachs are normal munachs, and sound identical, ie. each the same as if there were only one munach there.

mercha munach etnachta -- does not appear in Chumash; perhaps you meant tipcha munach etnachta, whereupon in this case also the munach would be a normal munach.

The only place I've seen where other people (not I) do a shaky trope on a munach that isn't a munach-legarmei is: munach mapach pashta zakef-qaton, and similar. I believe (and it seems that Joshua Jacobson also believes) that this would incorrect, as this munach is a conjunctive trope, and should lead in to the mapach which leads in to the pashta, instead of standing on its own.


As @DoubleAA points out, Rabbi Breuer holds that in the phrase munach | revia, the vertical line always indicates that the munach is actually munach-legarmei, contrary to the opinion(s) quoted in Jacobson's Chanting the Hebrew Bible (except in Isaiah 42:5, where the mesorah ketana indicates otherwise). The mesorah ketana substantiates this position, by indicates at Isaiah 42:5 that there is the only occurrence of this pattern with a psik (and not a munach-legarmei).

share|improve this answer
    
With munach pazer, are you saying that one gets a shaky, both, or none? As i said, i do them shaky. I think i have seen mercha munach etnachta, that's why i included it. Not very common, but once or twice. – Scimonster Mar 30 '14 at 14:18
    
"tipcha munach etnachta, whereupon in this case also the munach would have shaky trope": did you mean "tipcha munach | etnachta"? – msh210 Mar 30 '14 at 14:35
    
@Scimonster I clarified my answer: if there's no | then neither munach gets a shaky trope. With regards to "mercha munach etnachta", according to the BHS, this only occurs in Psalms 118:5 and 1Chronicles 15:13, neither of which are leined. There are occasions of "mercha munach" in Torah, but all of them are followed by a |, so the munach would get a shaky trope. There are plenty of examples of "tipcha munach etnachta" but none of "tipcha munach | etnachta". – magicker72 Mar 30 '14 at 17:27
1  
I don't think this accurately represent R Breuer's position (can't speak to the others'). My understanding is he thinks a munach-psik-revii is always a legarmei except for Isaiah 42:5 where if you look at Leningrad there's a Mesora note that it's a Psik. Thus we infer that everywhere else is a Legarmei. – Double AA Feb 12 at 4:48
1  
William Wickes agrees withe me books.google.com/… footnote 3. – Double AA Feb 12 at 5:25

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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