[HANASHIR:5712] Re: Trope question

[Victor Tunkel <V.Tunkel...>]

>In a message dated 4/6/00 5:44:22 AM Central Daylight Time, 
>V(dot)Tunkel (at) qmw(dot)ac(dot)uk writes:
>
><< Dear Barb:   If the ba'alei masorah had wanted a mapach, they would have 
>put
> one there.  See my reply below to Ruth's question. >>
>Then appropos your statement--why make it a mercha at all?  Got my info from 
>Spiro (and although he simplifies--not to mention what he does to the opening 
>of the BBefore the Haftarah).  I'm only saying there is more than one 
>interpretation of trope.  Think about the kadma-katon on one word.  I have 
>two differing sources on singing that as well (one which argues for singing 
>the kadma pashta-like) and the other as a kadma.  I understand both 
>arguements.
>
>barb
>
>-Dear Barb:  sorry, but you can't have a pashta-katon or a kadma-katon on
one word.  The first sign can't be a pashta because that trop can only fall
on the last letter of a word (post-positive); and can't be a kadma because
that sign must be on the accented syllable.  It is usually called either a
metiga or a maqel.  I prefer the latter so as not to confuse it with a
meteg.  It is actually a jumped-up meteg where, on a long word, or on two
words liked by a maqef, there is contained a closed syllable.  The masoretes
wanted it to have some extra musical expression or they would have left it
as a meteg.  In our (western) style maqel-katon gets quite a flourish, and
is not at all like a normal pashta followed by a normal katon.  

The basic books like Spiro are ok for up to barmitzva but we don't have to
stay at that low level all our lives, surely?  

yours   Victor Tunkel

------------------------ hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org -----------------------+