Hebrew Syllabification

[Mark Nigro]

I am not sure how to divide and classify רוּחַ. Can anyone tell me if this should be considered one closed syllable (CVC) since shureq and the furtive patach are joined in pronunciation? And do we give the vowel combo (shureq/patach) a long classification? Thanks!

Edited May 24, 2012 by Mark Nigro

[Harold Hosch]

Mark, ruach is CVC. In certain words a final guttural will require a furtive patach. In Accordance BH, and in some other texts with Hebrew the patach is misaligned. The ruach word may be either feminine or masculine, only noted of course when the word is the subject of a verb. In Ezekiel 2:2 the prophet has ruach as the subject of two verbs (common in Ezekiel) and both verbs are feminine. However in Ezekiel 11:5 "ruach of YHWH" is used with two verbs with the first 'to fall' being feminine, and the second 'to speak' being masculine. By the way, it might be helpful to note that the plural of ruach is ruchot, with the patach dropped. i trust these little 'tidbits' of information might be useful. Harold.

[Mark Nigro]

Thank you Harold, for those insights and the confirmation. Regarding the misaligned furtive patach, I noticed that also in the BHS but imagine it's not an issue for those who know what to look for and have a grasp on the vocabulary. Curious though if that could be addressed in future updates of the BHS or if the Quinta will have it. Likely the patach issue springs from the e-text Accordance received.

[Bob Kuo]

I believe the problem is not in the texts but rather in the fonts that display them.

[Eleuterio]

Hello! I found this topic from... 2012! We haven't found a solution to this yet? AFAIK, there is an issue with Unicode fonts contextual alternates display. Like some fonts would be able to 'make the trick', i.e., shifting the patach backwards when needed, while others can't. And I guess this depends also on the word processor's capabilities of handling Unicode features. 

 

BUT in any case: What I would expect is that a program like Accordance would be able to show the furtive patach accurately in position, even when it could be then displaced when pasting the copied text into a word processor, due to Unicode limitations and so on. Is it so difficult to find a workaround for this? Frequent users of Accordance for working with (and reading) Hebrew text will thank this improvement (of course, also in Accordance for iOS)...

[Fabian]

Hello! I found this topic from... 2012! We haven't found a solution to this yet? AFAIK, there is an issue with Unicode fonts contextual alternates display. Like some fonts would be able to 'make the trick', i.e., shifting the patach backwards when needed, while others can't. And I guess this depends also on the word processor's capabilities of handling Unicode features. 

 

BUT in any case: What I would expect is that a program like Accordance would be able to show the furtive patach accurately in position, even when it could be then displaced when pasting the copied text into a word processor, due to Unicode limitations and so on. Is it so difficult to find a workaround for this? Frequent users of Accordance for working with (and reading) Hebrew text will thank this improvement (of course, also in Accordance for iOS)...

I requested by the unicode consortium for a correct furtive patach.

 

May others have to.

 

Greetings

 

Fabian

[Eleuterio]

Thanks Fabian, for your response. What I get from the documents you sent me by private message is that it is, in fact, considered a rendering problem, they don't consider furtive patah a distinct character.

 

I can live with that, as long as: 

 

- Unicode Hebre fonts like SBL Hebrew, Ezra SIL, Cardo, can do this rendering fix when needed. 

- Programs like WordProcessors and / or Accordance can do this rendering. 

 

Because AFAIK, Accordance Hebrew display font is not Unicode in itself. So it should be solved by a special rendering inside the program. 

 

BTW: Does anyone know of a Hebrew font that can do this rendering fix of furtive patah?