[Heb-NACO] בגלל

[Shinohara, Jasmin]

Hello Collective Wisdom, please remind me: if there’s an entry in E-Sh., even if it ends with a “see also”, is that sufficient justification for romanizing the word as a word as opposed to a compound? E.g. בגלל has a direct entry, so I’d think it would be romanized biglal (NOT bigelal because as a whole word, the sheva would be considered merahef, ignored in romanization), but the entry also says “see גלל”. So which is it: Biglal or Bi-gelal?

Thanks, Jasmin


---
Jasmin Shinohara
Hebraica Cataloging Librarian
University of Pennsylvania
Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center
3420 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
T. 215-746-6397
jshino at upenn.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/heb-naco/attachments/20190207/eb0562a6/attachment.html>