SUPPLEMENT
TO THE
CODE MANUAL FOR THE MICHIGAN OLD TESTAMENT
by
Alan Groves
Westminster Theological Seminary
Philadelphia, PA 19118
Last Revised 6/7/89
PLEASE RETURN ALL CORRECTIONS TO ALAN GROVES AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
THANK YOU.
1. Introduction
This document is a supplement to "Code Manual for the
Michigan Old Testament". Knowledge of that document is
presupposed at all points which follow. "MCMOT" will be used
to indicate references to the Michigan manual in the
following material.
1.1 This supplement is a result of our work to verify the Michigan
text of BHS. This verification work was done by a team
at Westminster Seminary under the direction of Alan Groves and
Emanuel Tov (Hebrew University). The text, as it now exists,
is no longer precisely the text of BHS (1983 edition).
We have suggested readings of L that differ from those
made by the editors of BHS. (See 2.5 and the final explanation
below for a discussion of how we have done this.)
1.2 The present machine-readable text of the Michigan-Claremont
version of the text of BHS has been verified by means of a
computer aided comparison with an the following machine-
readable texts:
1.2.1 An independently encoded text from the Abbaye de Maredsous
1.2.2 An independently proofread version of the M-C text from Bar
Ilan University.
1.3 Moreover, verification of certain features (e.g. position of
cantillation within each word) was done automatically by
means of software written for that purpose.
1.4 For suspected problems with the printed text of BHS (1983
edition), we appealed to the two other published versions of
the Codex Leningradensis:
1.4.1 "The Holy Scriptures" edited by Aron Dotan (Adi, Tel Aviv,
1974)
1.4.2 BHK (Third edition)
1.5 At all points of variance between Dotan and BHS or BHS and
BHK, we also examined the photo facsimiles of the codex
(Codex Leningradensis b19A, D.S. Loewinger, Makor, Jerusalem,
1971.)
1.6 Two notes are important for further understanding our work:
1.6.1 The United Bible Society did not work from the Makor
photo-facsimiles in producing BHS. Rather, they worked
from a separate set of microfilm. Having now seen both
photographic reproductions, we are convinced that Makor is
clearer at almost all points of dispute. Certain features
of the codex that are invisible on the microfilm show up in
the Makor photographs. We hope to publish an article
concerning this.
1.6.2 Because some typographical errors in the 1977 edition have
already been corrected in the 1983 edition, we used the
latter as the basis of our proofreading. (The 1977 edition
was the basis for the input). As a result, several of the
']' flags that were in earlier versions of the
machine-readable text have been removed.
1.7 The results of our work therefore, are as follows:
1.7.1 A text that, we believe, improves on BHS in terms of
reflecting the codex (Makor photofacsimile)
1.7.2 A text which is more accurate than other currently
available machine-readable texts.
2. The current version of the text differs from the description
given in the MCMOT as follows:
2.1 The logical record length is now variable (up to 80
characters). See MCMOT 2.1.2.
2.2 Unlike earlier versions of the database, each verse has the
chapter number listed in its citation. (This is an exception
to MCMOT 2.1.4.) The format conforms, however, to the CCAT
format of ~x = chapter, ~y = verse etc. A "convbhs.com"
has been included on the first diskette to present the text
with clearer citations. See the "convbhs.doc" on the first
diskette.
2.3 The second and third records of each file have been removed.
These records listed the various ASCII characters used in the
transliteration of the text. (This is an exception to MCMOT
2.1.3.)
2.4 The Ketib-Qere is as described in MCMOT 3.6 with the
following exceptions:
2.4.1 Contrary to MCMOT 3.6.2, KQ involving only the first word
of a compound joined by a maqqef will be done differently
than is indicated in the manual. (The second example in
MCMOT 3.6.2 is the issue here.) The maqqef always belongs
to the Ketib, never the Qere. This will facilitate
printing.
2.4.1.1 Ruth 4:6 becomes *LIG:)FWL-LI80Y **LIG:)FL
2.4.1.2 Also, note that Exodus 21:8 is ):A$ER-?*LO)
(See Supplement 2.6 on '?')
2.4.2 The Ketib wela Qere is indicated by the unvocalized Ketib
followed by **zz. The Qere wela Ketib is *zz followed by
the Qere. (This represents a change to the statements at
the end of the first paragraph of MCMOT 3.6.)
2.4.3 The user should note that we have not thoroughly verified the
accuracy of the vocalization and cantillation of the KQ.
2.5 MCMOT 4.2 is no longer accurate. ']', and not '!', is used
to mark deviations from BHS or to note other special
features. In particular, we have expanded the coding to make
the flagging procedure more precise by adding a single
character or numeral following the bracket to indicate
something special about the text. (For all the details, see
the end of this supplement document entitled "Explanation of
the Right-Hand Bracket".) The user should note that most of
these notes have been stripped from this version.
2.5.1 The user should remember that we based our corrections on
the 1983 edition of BHS. (See Supplement 1.6.2.) We do
not retain a bracket where the 1983 edition has already
made a correction to the 1977 edition.
2.6 The cantillation coding varies from that which is described
in MCMOT 3.5 as follows:
2.6.1 Referring to the Tabula Accentuum which accompanies BHS,
#10 in the Accentus Communes lists a second case for the
occurrence of the pasta in tandem. Originally, the first
mark was encoded as an 'azla ('63' in the Michigan format)
and the second as a pasta ('03' in the Michigan format).
We have made the first mark a '33'. Note that it is
written after the letter not over it (unlike the 'azla).
The coding of the pasta remains '03'.
2.7 A '?' is used to mark the physical end of the line as it
appears in BHS.
2.7.1 A space will follow a '?' except where a maqqef ('-') ends
a line in BHS.
(e.g. Gn 1:2 W:HF)F81REC)? HFY:TF71H)
2.7.2 In that case, the '-?' will be followed by the next word
without intervening space. (e.g. Gn 1:4 )ET-?HF)O71WR)
2.7.3 The '?' has not been verified systematically at this point.
2.8 We have adapted the premorphological encoding ('/') to
reflect the citations in Even Shoshan's concordance. (We
recognize that the concordance is based on the Koren edition
of the Bible. However, the differences between the Koren
text and BHS have no impact on this issue.)
2.8.1 One result is that there is a standard against which our
work can be evaluated and that there is only one standard
used.
2.8.2 This means that any supposed compound form that is listed
as a separate entitiy under its compound form (as opposed
to being listed solely under one or both components of the
compound) is treated as a unit. In such cases no
premorphological divider has been used. Listed below are
the 6 exceptions to this rule. In each case the
premorphological divider has been kept to indicate a prefix
(a caret marks the place where the accent would most likely
occur).
2.8.2.1 K.F/M.F^H
2.8.2.2 LF/K"^N
2.8.2.3 L:/PI^Y
2.8.2.4 LF^/M.FH
2.8.2.5 LI/P:N"^Y
2.8.2.6 MI/P:N"^Y
3. SPECIAL NOTE #1 The following items have not been verified
as thoroughly as other items in the text:
3.1 The premorphological indicator '/' will be more
comprehensively verified in the morphological verification
yet to come.
3.2 The '?' which marks the physical end of the line in BHS has
not been verified consistently.
3.3 The accuracy of the right-hand and left-hand cantillation
markings require checking against the codex (i.e. 75 and 95
in the text.)
3.4 The vocalization of the ketiv-qere entries needs work.
4. SPECIAL NOTE #2 No matter how careful we have been, we
have certainly left some errors. For example, any time that
the encoding of Maredsous text was wrong in the same way as
the M-C encoding, we are not likely to have picked up the
error. (The probability of making the same error at the same
place is not high. We know of only one case. The one case
was uncovered by a scribe doing spot checks on a printed
version of our proofread text (printed in Hebrew, fully
vocalized and cantillated). In this way about 12% of the
text was checked and only this one coincidence of error was
observed.) While we believe remaining errors are minimal,
some still exist.
***********************************************************
***********************************************************
EXPLANATION OF THE RIGHT-HAND BRACKET ']*'
(All bracketing has been done on the basis of the 1983 edition,
not the 1977 edition. Moreover, the Makor edition of the
codex was checked at all relevant points in determining the
need for a flag.)
]1 BHS has been faithful to the Leningrad Codex where there might
be a question of the validity of the form and we keep the same
form as BHS.
e.g. Deuteronomy 23:18 YI&RF)"L00]1 (missing silluq)
]2 We have added a sop pasuq where L and BHS omit it.
**********
(Special note: Formerly this category had a much broader range
and read as follows: "BHS has been faithful to the Codex where
there might be a question of the validity of the form and we
have abandoned BHS in order to code it differently." All
situations other than missing sop pasuqs have now been made to
conform to L and then labeled as ]1.
**********
]3 We read or understand L differently than BHS (1983 Edition).
Often this notation indicates a typographical error in BHS.
e.g. Genesis 6:22 ):ELOHI73YM]3
]4 Puncta Extraordaria -- a 52 is used to mark such marks in the
text when they are above the line and 53 when they are below
the line.
e.g. Genesis 18:9 )"52LF8052Y52W52]4
]5 Large letter(s)
]6 Small letter(s)
]7 Suspended letter(s)
]8 Inverted Nun (N]8 in the text)
]9 BHS has abandoned L and we concur. All of these occurrences
are ketib/qere problems.
]q We have abandoned or added a ketib/qere relative to BHS. In
doing this we agree with L against BHS.
e.g. Exodus 32:17 B.:/R:(O92H]q
]a Adaptations to a Qere which L and BHS, by their design, do not
indicate.
e.g. Exodus 4:2 **-Z.E74H]a
]y Yathir readings in L which we have designated as Qeres when
both Dothan and BHS list a Qere.
]m Miscellaneous notes to the text and occasions where more than
one bracket category applies.
Guide to Transliteration
Consonants Vowels
Hebrew Michigan Hebrew Michigan
Alef ) Patah A
Bet B Qamets F
Gimel G Segol E
Dalet D Tsere "
Heh H Hireq I
Waw W Holem OW
Zayin Z Qamets
Het X Hatuf F
Tet + Qibbuts U
Yod Y Shureq W.
Kaf K Shewa :
Lamed L Hatef
Mem M Patah :A
Nun N Hatef
Samek S Segol :E
Peh P Hatef
Ayin ( Qamets :F
Tsade C
Qof Q Miscellaneous
Resh R
Sin & Ketiv *
Shin $ Qere **
Tav T Dagesh .
Maqqef -
HEBREW ACCENTS/CANTILLATION CODING
(named and cross referenced as in the TABULA ACCENTUM insert card
in BHS)
Westminster Text TABULA ACCENTUM (BHS)
At END (to left) of word and ABOVE
00 ; --- sop pasuq [end of verse]
01 .:--- segolta I.3
02 )--- zarqa, sinnor I.9,II.7
03 \--- pashta, azla legarmeh I.10a,II.12
04 &--- telisha parvum I.25
05 |--- paseq [separator] "Nota"
- |-,-- legarmeh (74 + 05) I.18
At START (to right) of word and BELOW
10 ---< yetib (yetiv) I.11
13 ---\ dehi or tipha II.9
At START (to right) of word and ABOVE
11 ---/ (81 + ) mugrash II.5
14 ---% telisha magnum I.17
ABOVE word
24 -&-- telisha qetannah (med) -
33 --\- (with 03, left of letter) I.10(b)
44 -%-- telisha magnum (med) -
60 --<- ole or mahpakatum (II.2)
61 -/-- geresh or teres I.13
62 -"-- garshajim I.14
63 -\-- azla, azla or qadma I.24,II.19
64 -,-- illuj II.15
65 -#-- shalshelet (magn,parv) I.4,II.6+20
80 -:-- zaqep parvum I.5
81 -.-- rebia (magnum=parvum) I.7,II.4=8
82 --)- sinnorit II.21
83 -+-- pazer I.15,II.10
84 -&%-- pazer mag. or qarne para I.16
85 -|:-- zaqep magnum I.6
BELOW word
35 -F|:-- meteg (med) -
70 -<-- mahpak or mehuppak I.20,II.11+18
71 -/-- mereka I.21,II.14
72 -//-- mereka kepulah (duplex) I.22
73 -\-- tipha, tarha I.8,II.16
- --\-- majela [= 73] I.27
74 -,-- munah I.18-19,II.13
75 -|-- silluq [meteg (left)] I.1,II.1
91 -./-- tebir I.12
92 -^-- atnah I.2,II.3
93 -v-- galgal or jerah I.26,II.17
94 -s-- darga I.23
95 -|-- meteg (right) [cf 35,75] -
