Is this qamets placed correctly?

[Abram K-J]

It's early and I haven't had coffee yet, so possible I'm seeing things--I also don't have a print BHS at hand.

But the qamets in the word that I've selected in the attached image looks like it's too far right on the screen. Even with the cantillation mark, shouldn't the qamets be centered right under the consonant?

[Abram K-J]

Another instance to note, here. This is from Isaiah 2:2.

 

If it is placed correctly, I'll be glad (like many Hebrew readers) to have someone let me know so I can increase my limited knowledge of cantillation marks/placement.

[Brian K. Mitchell]

--I also don't have a print BHS at hand.

But the qamets in the word that I've selected in the attached image looks like it's too far right on the screen. Even with the cantillation mark, shouldn't the qamets be centered right under the consonant?

 

Here's what the BHS has:

 

Whenever, in doubt also check:

Breuer, Mordecai's Tanakh published by Mossad HaRav Kook

Dotan Aaron's Tanakh (BHL) published by Hendrickson

Koren Tanakh published by Koren

Keter Yerushalayim Tanakh sold in the US by JPS

[Abram K-J]

Interestingly, Isaiah 2:1 is different in Accordance vis-a-vis BHS. Note and compare the attached, at the qamets under the name of Isaiah. It does appear to be aligned differently in Accordance, for whatever reason.

 

Also, the cantillation mark appears straight in print BHS but curved in Accordance. Why is that?

Edited November 25, 2013 by Abram K-J

[Brian K. Mitchell]

Usually, the Qamets is centered under a consonant even if there is an accent. However, even in 'some' printed Tanakh this is not always possible even though it maybe ideal. Printed editions of the Tanakh differ not only in their placement of accents and vowels with the specific vowels/accents that occur.

 

The Meteg (not really an accent) is one of the marks that has caused issue for typesetters of printed texts not to mention the fact that not everybody sees eye to eye on where the meteg should appear. Compare, the Koren Tanakh with Snaith's Tanakh and the BHS in regard to the Meteg and I am sure you will see what I mean.

[Brian K. Mitchell]

 

Also, the cantillation mark appears straight in print BHS but curved in Accordance. Why is that?

The printed BHS is a diplomatic edition of the Leningrad Codex and as such it retains the form of the accent marks used in that codex. The curved or the stylized accents that Accordance uses are actually the 'modern' standard form of the te'amim most widely used today. By the way The original BHK had the curved accents, but when they released the BHS they sort of broke the mold.

Edited November 25, 2013 by bkMitchell

[Abram K-J]

Thanks for the clarifications, bk.

 

I'll be curious to hear someone from Accordance weigh in as to whether or not the placement of the qamets in this instance is intentional. Given the number of Hebrew scholars they seem to generally consult, I'd assume so, but it still does appear a bit "off" to me on the screen.

[Helen Brown]

We can only do our best to place both vowels and te'amim under the very narrow letters. Obviously a typesetter can tweak these individually, ours is done by algorithms. On the whole I think our text looks pretty close to the print.

 

If you export to Unicode then each application is responsible to place the characters correctly in each font.

[Abram K-J]

That's a good point--they seem to be placed correctly on the wider letters; I mostly have noticed yuds and vavs where the placement was noticeable.

[Anthony Pyles]

For reference, here's the Ps 27 passage in the Aleppo Codex. Pretty neat to see the consonants and the vowels/accents in two different shades of ink!