10

My Koren Ma'alot Tanakh (2018, ISBN 978-965-301-894-5) has Iyov 22:21 like this:

הַסְכֶּן־נָ֣א עִמּ֑וֹ וּשְׁלָ֑ם בָּ֝הֶ֗ם תְּֽבוֹאָֽתְךָ֥ טוֹבָֽה׃

Is this a mistake, or is it trying to indicate an uncertainty, or something else?


I checked the Allepo Codex and it has an etnaḥta on ושלם only. On the Leningrad Codex it has it on עמו only. Still, it seems unlikely to me that Koren would try to "merge" the two texts when it does not do so (to my knowledge) in other places of disagreement.

  • 2
    Koren doesn't use either Aleppo or Leningrad afaik so it must be something else. But ya, definitely not original. Cool find – Double AA Jul 10 at 20:31
  • 2
    And apparently it's only in some of Koren's editions. The non-Ma'alot-edition Koren has the אתנחתא only on ושלם. (Or my own copy does, at least.) – Rish Jul 10 at 20:38
  • I believe the 'Oleh w'Yored is the most powerful intra pasuk dividers, followed by the athnah and then the revi'a. There is a ta'am that looks like an upside down athnah, perhaps they got it mixed up? – Aaron Jul 10 at 21:03
  • 2
    @Aaron You are right that oleh v'yored is more powerful than etnaḥta. The upside down ta'am you mentioned is the galgal, and as far as I know it only appears before the the pazer or oleh v'yored. – HaLailah HaZeh Jul 10 at 21:09
  • The atnach hafuch (galgal) also appears before an etnachtah, although I believe that there are generally intermediate joining trops between it and the pausal trop – Noach MiFrankfurt Jul 11 at 2:46
1

This is a mistake. The older editions of the Koren Tanach don't have this, and have the ethnachta on ושלם.

Unfortunately, I have found that many times in the new Koren Tanach (2016 edition) the cantilation marks are obviously mistaken (to one familiar enough). The mistakes always have the cantilation the same as an earlier appearance of the word with the same nikud in that sefer, I believe the way it first appears. This case follows this rule. I have found this many times in words with a kametz koton or Shiva Na (which are emphasized in the new edition), for explore the word ירבעם, and this is the first example I've found in a word without one.

Many of these mistakes have already been corrected in those copies sold this year (2019).

  • Can you identify more precisely a specific earlier edition that didn't have the error? – Double AA Aug 15 at 20:45
  • 1
    My Koren Tanach from the 90's doesn't have the error in this case. The pattern that I point out is clearly only in the new editions that emphasize the kometz koton and shiva na; new editions from just a few years ago without them don't have the mistakes. – Mordechai Aug 15 at 20:51
  • You should reach out to them and point out the issues. I found them to be highly responsive and genuinely interested in feedback. – mbloch Aug 16 at 4:05
  • I am not sure I understand what you mean by "The mistakes always have the cantilation the same as an earlier appearance of the word with the same nikud in that sefer, I believe the way it first appears. " Can you provide an example? – HaLailah HaZeh Aug 16 at 21:48
  • Which ירבעם... I need to search in one of the earlier copies, and that's at shul. – Mordechai Aug 17 at 20:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .