I'm talking about your samples: ulpanah, geulah; NOT the whole langauge! And it does not matter if it is modern, liturgy or modern liturgy.
> I figured that perhaps in Aramaic, a dagesh does not appear here
> most dagesh is missing in modern Hebrew with nikkud, except for the beit, kaf, peh, and taf. The dagesh in other letters is merely grammatical.
BTW, about Kehot — what did you say they have; the custom mark abvoe the sheva na, and what else -- kamats katan?
Shay Lemorah has it all: shva-na, kamatz katan, hataf kamatz katan (because the publisher is in deed a recognized scholar), except for the furtive patach (Koren publishers and Feldhein publishers [recently] has it). The shva-na is a shva with an aterisk above the letter with a circle closely around it.
Kehot usually has only the shva-na, because the original yoshave rosh (the director), the seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneersohn, insisted upon its inclusion. The new books since his demise have a very small asterisk only, as the new director wants to scrap it altogether (but since the Rebbe wanted it, it remains). ArtScroll had it, but recently not (perhaps, due to their software and font).
Haven't you seen nikkud text without the dagesh in many of the letters? I am trying to recall where I saw this occur commonly?
About ulpana and geula, let me research samples.
Btw, BestBuy is sending my scanner back to HP, and promises to return it in about a month. Patience...
> Kehot usually has only the shva-na
And I guess that you have books published by Kehot, right? And only with shva na, nothing else, right?
> Haven’t you seen nikkud text without the dagesh in many of the letters?
Show a sample.
> And I guess that you have books published by Kehot, right? And only with shva na, nothing else, right?
Most nikkud texts from Kehot have shva-na. Some do not, from over two decades ago.
Ver few publishers in general have kamatz katan. ArtScroll doesn't.
Only Shay Lemorah has kamatz katan, and even hataf kamatz katan.
Feldheim, Koren, and I heard JTS too has the furtive patach.
Who has kamatz katan besides Shay Lemorah?
The ISO10646/Unicode proposal documentation for qamats qatan, submitted by Mark Shoulson & Michael Everson, included scans from three publications displaying this form of qamats in a manner visually distinct from qamats gadol. These were
Riahi, S. M., ed. ספר תהלים סימנים. Jerusalem: Feldheim Press, 2001.
Shiovitz, Jeffrey, ed. B’kol Echad בקול אחד. New York: United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, 2001.
Tal, Shlomo, ed. סדור רנת ישראל: נוסח אשכנז. Jerusalem: Keter Press, 1976.
Thank you, John,
Clearly, these glyphs representing important Hebrew rules are becoming more and more widespread as they become standard parts of encoding standards and Hebrew typefaces.
Feldheim Press of Jerusalem, Israel/Monsey, NY and Keter Press of Jerusalem, Israel are two very large and significant Orthodox Jewish Publishers, third and fourth to ArtScroll/Mesorah Publishers of Boro Park, Brooklyn, NY and Kehot Publication Society of Crown Heights, Brooklyn, NY/Kfar Chabad, Israel.
Keter's prayerbook, סדור רנת ישראל: נוסח אשכנז, is one of the most popular prayerbooks, used by close to a hundred thousand Jews. Maybe much more. Orthodox do not submit to census.
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism's prayerbook is used by even more Jews.
I was told by Rabbi Sue Ann Wasserman that the appearance of the kamatz katan is a standard part of Reform Judaism's prayerbook as well. She writes: "the [new] Reform Siddur Mishkan Tfilla and the Revised Plaut Torah Commentary differentiate between a kamatz katan and a kamatz gadol".
However, only the smaller Shay Lemorah Publishers of Jerusalem feature also the hataf komatz katan.
The largest Jewish publishers, ArtScroll/Mesorah and Kehot, employ the shva-na symbol, joined also by Shay Lemorah.
Israel, see the new thread.