Uh . . .

[jaybr...@gmail.com]

[RA Alpert]

Because of course the taam falls on the...chataf patach!

On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 1:25 PM jaybr...@gmail.com <jaybr...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leining" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leining+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/61c1df14-6026-4e88-8edb-ea2f48ab504an%40googlegroups.com.

[Jay Braun]

בדייוק!

On Nov 7, 2025, at 10:42 AM, RA Alpert <ral...@kajinc.org> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/CAF3zBphJuFQmLMw14ea8hZLjeXSt_RCSjQn%2B1UpsEAQ8Ao--8A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeremy Rosenbaum Simon]

Um…it’s a shva na. (yes, I know the back-and-forth on it. But I am very firmly in R. Breuer’s camp here.)

On Nov 7, 2025, at 1:42 PM, RA Alpert <ral...@kajinc.org> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/CAF3zBphJuFQmLMw14ea8hZLjeXSt_RCSjQn%2B1UpsEAQ8Ao--8A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Andrew Sicklick]

Simanim has explained in letters that it is not a chataf patach. It is a shva na. The printed chataf patach is an error from the older custom to delineate shva na  with a chataf patach. Like רבבות. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 7, 2025, at 1:48 PM, Jay Braun  <jaybr...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/2BB956A2-E198-4A81-8CC7-160C8F311386%40gmail.com.

[Jay Braun]

Exactly. The sharpshooters usually get both wrong. 

On Nov 7, 2025, at 11:02 AM, Andrew Sicklick <thebra...@gmail.com> wrote:

Simanim has explained in letters that it is not a chataf patach. It is a shva na. The printed chataf patach is an error from the older custom to delineate shva na  with a chataf patach. Like רבבות. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/D0BBAD28-781D-4640-A239-E76BBEFF4FB1%40gmail.com.

[RA Alpert]

Roedelheim would demur....

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/6730EF08-7FBD-431B-85B5-B0203ABC70E0%40gmail.com.

[Jeremy Rosenbaum Simon]

Indeed. 

On Nov 7, 2025, at 2:12 PM, RA Alpert <ral...@kajinc.org> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/CAF3zBphBQNDL9eboAt2pF7DeiC1L-Mg4dpZ_XsYCEtcOFW3xLA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jonathan Katz]

Grammatically speaking, why would a chataf patach ever appear under a non-gutteral letter?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/92E5FA65-81E9-40BD-AA0C-41A668A342B1%40nyu.edu.

[Ari Kinsberg]

It can technically be written with a sheva or a hataf patah, neither is “right” or “wrong.” But for our purposes here, either nikkud would indicate that one pronounces it  as a sheva na and not as a patah. (Unless one is a Tiberian or Yemenite purist, in which case it is pronounced as a patah regardless of whether there is a sheva or a hataf patah.)

**************

Ari Kinsberg, MA, PharmD

Brooklyn, New York

Consultant for Rare Books and Manuscripts

Registered Pharmacist (NYS, Ohio)

Licensed Immunizer (NYS)

On Nov 7, 2025, at 2:23 PM, Jeremy Rosenbaum Simon <jr...@nyu.edu> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leining/92E5FA65-81E9-40BD-AA0C-41A668A342B1%40nyu.edu.

[stephenkap...@gmail.com]

Ahh, the ancient debate:   Do ta'amim serve a grammatical function?  Yes.  Are they "grammar"?   No.  

There are other grammatical solutions (like dagesh chazak) for non-gutteral letters that obviate the need for a a chataf-patach under the letter.

There obviously is an explanation (are many explanations) for that chataf-patach, but they aren't "grammatical."