5

כִּ֤י לֹא־נַ֙חַשׁ֙ בְּיַעֲקֹ֔ב וְלֹא־קֶ֖סֶם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל כָּעֵ֗ת יֵאָמֵ֤ר לְיַעֲקֹב֙ וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל מַה־פָּ֖עַל אֵֽל׃ ‏

Bamidbar 23:23

The word פעל is mile'eil (according to R' Breuer's conclusion based on Ben Asher and several manuscripts).

The Maaneh Lashon essay on the side of Tikkun Simanim says that the Keter has this version (I'm not sure how they know that) and points out that

והוא פלאי, שלא מצינו נסו"א בטעם מפסיק, ואולי י"ל שהוא רק מלעיל מכח ההפסק כמו אל-המשתה אשר עשתה. ‏

This is weird, because there's never nasog achor on a pausal trop. Maybe it's mile'eil because of the pause, like Esther 5:12.

I don't find their suggestion particularly convincing. I can't think of any other place where a male verb acts in this way, and anyway this tipcha is far from the biggest break in the pasuk.

Does anyone suggest that the trop on פעל is actually a me'ayla, which looks the same as a tipcha but isn't pausal, and so this is a normal nasog achor? Are there any other places where a trop that appears on its own word might be a me'ayla?

Improve this question
2
  • It's interesting, because in the Yellin Tanakh it's not marked, but I see your version in the Leningrad Codex and all relevant editions as well.
    – Kazi bácsi
    Commented Jul 3, 2020 at 17:04
  • 2
    Maalya can't make a proper nasog achor; it's always on the same word as the sof pasuk. (The fact that there's no makkaf here would normally be solid proof, except makkafs sometimes aren't written where they are 'obvious'. If there's an assumed makkaf though that could be a reason to move the secondary accent around.)
    – Double AA ♦
    Commented Jul 3, 2020 at 17:05

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.