Towards Better Davening and Torah Reading
Parshat Vayigash

Column #51. Contents of this weekly column are (mostly) based on the sefer: EIM LAMIKRA HASHALEIM, by R' Nissan Sharoni, Ashdod, a guide to correct pronunciation of Hebrew, specifically in davening and Torah reading.

Let’s present some reader feedback on a few topics.

Yosef’s wife. Whenever her name appears in Torah Tidbits as Osnat, someone (or two or three) writes in with the correct pronunciation. If you will notice in this issue, she is called A-s’nat. The point is that the SHVA under the SAMACH is a NA and belongs to the following syllable. The KAMATZ under the ALEF is a KAMATZ GADOL, pronounced in the “Israeli” pronunciation like the “o” in hot, as opposed to a KAMATZ KATAN which sounds like the “ou” in cough. Even in the Ashkenazis pronunciation, it is incorrect to pro- nounce her name AWS-NAS. It would be AW- S’NAS, with the accent on the last syllable. There are many words like this, where the sloppy pronunciation that so many of use got used to pronounces what is supposed to be a SHVA NA as a NACH and attaches it to the previous syllable – AL HATZADIKIM... V’AL P’LEITAT SO-F’REI- HEM. Not SOF-REIHEM. First syllable is SO, SAMACH-CHOLAM MALEI. Second syllable is F’REI (not FREI, but F’REI).

Next. After writing the whole business of the two ANA HASHEM phrases, trying to correct the way most of us brought from American davening, saying ho-SHI-a and hatz-LI-cha. Finally learning to say hatz-li-CHA, MILRA, while leaving ho-SHI-a as MIL’EL. Then come two emails, from two different people who did not coordinate their comments, that Rav Mordechai Breuer, a well- known expert on Biblical pronunciation, writes that ho-shi-A should also be MILRA. We’re still waiting this one out for further clarification.
Personal note: Because of many things from thses columns, I have found myself davening better, slower, understanding more, paying more attention, not going onto “automatic pilot” as often. I hope that some of the readers have experienced a similar enhancement of their davening.

I also made another discovery. Reading a chapter in the book and rendering it for this column is one thing. Experiencing that which is culled from the Sefer is another thing. A better thing than the former. Experience is an important teacher.

For example, let’s do a little more review of the SH’VA NA. We’ll use the weekday Amida for examples.

There are “easy” SH’VA NAs and harder ones. The easy ones are easy because the common naturally and because there really is no good way to get them wrong. R’TZEI, SH’VA under the REISH is NA. That’s the case with SH’VAs under the first letter of a word. (Practically always.) SH’MA is like that too, but we need pay a little extra attention when the sound of the first two letters blend easily. SH and M can be said as a single “blended consonant”. Bagel with a shmear please. In English pronunciation, we don’t say the SH and the M as distinct sounds. We blend them. In Hebrew, we DO say them distinctly. SH’-MA KOLEINU, not SHMA. Blending the two sounds would involve pronouncing the SH’VA under the SHIN as a NACH. It isn’t. It’s a NA. SH’MA. Again, this blending doesn’t work with all combinations of letters. V’KABEIL is easy, because there is no way to blend the VAV and the KUF. But the following word (in SH’MA KOLEINU) is B’RACHA- MIM. BET and REISH do blend, so we must be careful to separate them (but not overly so).

Another example, from the AL HATZADIKIM bracha (mentioned earlier). P’LEITAT. Don’t blend the PEI and the LAMED. They don’t blend in Hebrew. They do in English. We say I went to a play, not P’LAY.

The other “easy” SH’VA NA is the one following a SH’VA NACH. With two SH’VAs in a row, the first is usually NACH and the second one is NA. In SH’MA, UV-CHOL NAF-SH’CHA, the SH’VA of the FEI is NACH, that of the SHIN is NA. <mtc>