[Heb-NACO] Li-fene ha-nesi'ah

[Barry Walfish]

Thank you, Joan, for the clarification. The reliance on Alcalay is unfortunate and perhaps should be revisited some day. I checked the Horev Tikkun Kor'im, which indicates sheva na and nah and the sheva under pitdah is definitely nah.

Barry

From: heb-naco-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu [mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of Biella, Joan
Sent: September 6, 2012 9:09 AM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Li-fene ha-nesi'ah

1) re li-fene:  According to Hebraica Cataloging, p. 21, "in the few cases where Even-Shoshan may show the same word under more than one entry element, the more 'analytical' option is chosen."  There are definitions of "li-fene" under both lamed and peh, and therefore the standard romanization is "li-fene."  In the record Barry mentions, LCCN 2011483420, the hyphen was missing in the LC iteration of the record (the form was "lifene"); I've now added the hyphen.

2) re pitedah:  This romanization is an artifact of other statements in Hebraica Cataloging, on p. 16:  "Alcalay is frequently useful in determining the status of schwas"--and later on the same page:  "Alcalay is useful for the identification of schwa nah (quiescent) and schwa na' (mobile) in that he does not transcribe the schwa nah in his vocalization scheme."  Because of these comments, it is LC practice, if it's doubtful whether a schwa should be romanized as "e," to check Alcalay; if he indicates the schwa, we romanize it as a schwa na'.  This is the case with the word "pitedah."  The rule is not a very good one, because in fact Alcalay transcribes quite a few schwa nahs (remember "hehedir"), but it is considered better to follow the rule than to break it arbitrarily, as catalogers throughout the community are trying to follow the same rules.  In the record Barry mentions, the series called "Pitedah" was not even traced in the LC iteration, but I've now added it.

Joan

From: heb-naco-bounces+jbie=loc.gov at lists.service.ohio-state.edu<mailto:heb-naco-bounces+jbie=loc.gov at lists.service.ohio-state.edu> [mailto:heb-naco-bounces+jbie=loc.gov at lists.service.ohio-state.edu]<mailto:[mailto:heb-naco-bounces+jbie=loc.gov at lists.service.ohio-state.edu]> On Behalf Of Barry Walfish
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 12:27 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: [Heb-NACO] Li-fene ha-nesi'ah

Dear Safranim,

I have two questions about the romanization in the record for this title by Rivka Miriam and Meir Appelfeld (Raananah Even Hoshen, 2011). LCN 2011483420.

First, li-fene. Why not lifne? It seems to me that this is a word of which the preposition is an integral part.

Second, the series Pitedah. Why not Pitdah. There is no dagesh in the tet and the sheva is nah.

Thanks for your help,

Barry


Barry Dov Walfish, Ph.D.
Judaica and Theology Specialist
Collection Development Department and
Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library
University of Toronto Library
130 St. George St.
Toronto, ON
Canada M5S 1A5
phone: 416-946-3176 or 416-978-4319
fax: 416-978-1667 or 416-946-0635
e-mail: barry.walfish at utoronto.ca<mailto:barry.walfish at utoronto.ca>





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/heb-naco/attachments/20120906/1317c18c/attachment.html>