I have a similar question to Why is it a sheva na in ha-leviyim?

I have seen some siddurim indicate a shva nach in the yud of שֶׁכֵּן חובַת כָּל הַיְצוּרִים (shacharis of Shabbos, before yishtabach). And some a shva na.

Same thing for וְגַם כָּל הַיְצוּר לֹא נִכְחַד מִמֶּךָּ and כִּי זֵכֶר כָּל הַיְצוּר לְפָנֶיךָ בָּא (musaf of Rosh Hashana, bracha of zichronos).

As can be gathered from the answers to the above referenced question (and other questions on this site) the shva following הַ (meaning "the"), when the following letter does not have a dagesh, should be shva na only when the הַ has a meteg according the biblical mesorah. However, in this case, I have not found that word in tanach, so there would be no way of verifying that rule for this word.

My question is not which way is correct, but rather what consideration would the siddur editor take for such a word that is not found in tanach, and why would some editors conclude it's nach and some na?

1 Answer 1


Usually, a letter after the definite article has a dagesh hazak (unless it is a gutteral, or resh). Thus, a sheva under the initial letter of a noun with a definite article would be na.

In many (though not all) words that start with a sheva under a mem, yod, lamed, etc. the dagesh disappears. The rules of the sheva would normally dictate that in such a syllable, the sheva is nach.

Evidence for the pronunciation of the sheva na in at least some cases in (early?) masoretic Hebrew exists in words like הַיְבֵשֹׁות, which have a rafe on the letter after the first letter of the noun. The rafe may exist from a time when the dagesh appeared in the yod, which would have demanded a sheva na anyways.

In short: the late disappearance of the dagesh from the definite article in letters that have a sheva resulted in various opinions and confusion about the proper pronunciation of the sheva today.

You must log in to answer this question.

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