Another look with some new angles. This topic is responsible for this weekly column. It all started with the VAV that flips a past tense verb to become future tense. Partnered to future tense is TZIVUI, the command form of verbs. Let's start with a good example from this week's sedra of Eikev, with the words we say/sing in Birkat HaMazon (D'varim 8:10) KA'KA'TUV: V'ACHALTA V'SAVATA U'VEIRACTA... v'sa-VA-ta, however, does not behave the same way. It should have had the same accent-shift. But because the TROP on the word is an ETNACHTA (same for a SOF PASUK), the accent either stays put or goes back to the next-to-the-last syllable after it went to the last syllable from the next-to-the-last syllable where it was originally. Same difference. Two ways of saying it. Take a look in 8:12 PEN TOCHAL V'SAV'ATA U'VATIM TOVIM TIVNEH V'Y'SHAVTA: There is another situation (besides ETNACHTA and SOF PASUK) where the accent does not move to the last syllable, even though the tense is flipping. Verbs whose (three-letter) roots end in ALEF or HEI, their past tense verbs stay MIL'EIL with a tense-flipping VAV. And you shall build, u'va-NI-ta. Check out Sho-f'tim (the book, not the sedra) 6:26 - u'va-NI-ta miz-BEI-ach, and you will build and altar... The root of the word is BET-NUN-HEI, so the accent stays MIL'EIL even with a tense-flip. Similarly, v'ka-RA-ta, as in D'varim 20:10 - When you approach a city to do battle, you shall first offer peace, v'ka-RA-ta ei-LE-ha sha-LOM. KUF-REISH-ALEF, so the accent of v'ka-RA-ta stays MIL'EIL. And there is another situation for the accent to remain MIL'EIL, or rather to become MIL'EIL after it became MIL-RA. And that is the case of NASOG ACHOR, when the word is in a two word phrase with the following word very short or a 2-syllable MIL'EIL, then the accent migrates from the last to the next-to-the-last syllable. Let's go back to the word that started this week's column and find it in D'varim 27:7. Let's look at the whole pasuk. V'ZA'VACHTA SH'LAMIM V'ACHALTA SHAM V'SAMACHTA
LIFNEI HASHEM ELOKECHA: Now follow this: there are some who want to suggest that since v'a-CHAL-ta means "and you shall eat" in the context with SHAM after the word, then we shouldn't say that reading v'a-chal-TA in our benching pasuk with a wrong accent, should NOT be considered changing the meaning, and thus requiring a Baal Korei to reread the word. This argument says, Because, in D'varim 27:7, the word meaning "and you shall eat" is pronounced v'a-CHAL-ta, then misreading the word in D'varim 8:10 shouldn't be considered changing thre meaning of the word. It should be "simply" considered accenting the wrong syllable in a word. Reading ha-a-RETZ instead of ha-A-retz is just mis-accented. The meaning is still the same. Not an error that you have to insist be corrected. After checking with R' Nissan Sharoni and other knowledgeable people, the previous paragraph's argument seems very weak at best. In our first example, the word is v'a-chal-TA. It means and you will eat. If you pronounce it v'a-CHAL-ta you have not only mis-accented it; you have changed the meaning of the word. And remember: there are several of these words to pronounce carefully in the SH'MA. v'a-hav-TA, v'di- bar-TA (and the next word does not cause the accent to go back to MIL'EIL, even though it is similar to SHAM, as mentioned above), v'na-ta-TI - to mention just a few. One a totally different note, we get the second
parsha of the SH'MA from this week's sedra. There is an important
caution, especially in light of some sidduring that put a comma in
the wrong place. The second half of the first pasuk is: [The Parshat Eikev Homepage]
|