Why the multiple forms and ellipsis LHB Concordance

Which OS and version of Logos are you using, please?

I'm running 8.14 on Windows 10 and I get different results for LHB Amos: only one word form is in black per heading.

As for the difference between black and gray word forms, I may be wrong, but I believe the black word form is the more common one. The grey word forms have different cantillations than the heading word.

The ellipsis means there are more word forms (but the tool only shows up to five). The ellipsis is a link (that will show the additional forms).

It's interesting that you also get two ellipses, one in black and one in blue. Probably related to the multiple headings issue.

Beloved Amodeo said:

Is there any way to distinguish which forms are which not knowing Hebrew?

Cantillation has several purposes.

• It can indicate an accented syllable.
• It can show how a word should be chanted (sung).
• It can show the structure of a verse.

Cantillation is something a Rabbi or Cantor would understand well, but a layperson (like me) would know very little about.

If you don't know Hebrew, cantillation wouldn't be something you would start off learning. That would be like trying to tackle how to interpret a Hebrew verse, without knowing Hebrew vocabulary or grammar.

Beloved Amodeo said:

I noted that if you uncheck Combine All Word Forms the entries group separately.

Yes.

In English, this would be similar to whether or not love, loves, loved, loving, were grouped together.

The form may differ, but the meaning of the word tends to be the same.

Beloved Amodeo said:

Another question arises. What is the difference between the forms used in Am 3.8 and Am 3.11? They appear identical although they appear under different headwords, the first with count 4 and the second with count 10.

The cantillation marks aren't identical, but the meaning of the word -- my Lord -- is the same.

As to why the cantillation marks differ, that's far beyond what I understand or could answer.

MJ. Smith said:

PetahChristian said:

Cantillation has several purposes.

As a short-cut, think of Cantillation as the musical notation for Hebrew just as Russian chant is notated in the text (picture at the top of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Znamenny_chant) or to a lesser extent, the text is pointed for several Western chants. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_cantillation

If you’re going to chant Hebrew, you would definitely learn the musical notation. A Bar/Bat Mitzvah child can chant a Torah/haftarah portion.

If you’re going to learn Hebrew to read or speak or understand the language, you don’t need to know the musical notation. The focus is on pronunciation and comprehension.

If you’re going to study the Hebrew text to interpret it, you might learn the syntax of cantillation. In that sense, the notation serves more like punctuation.

Cantillation is complex, but it all comes together in helping to chant, pronounce, and interpret the text.

(An interesting aspect is that it helps, but it is not required. People can chant without any notation, just as modern Hebrew speakers are able to read newspapers, signs, and books without any vowels.)

Denise said:

It's quite readable

I think what you consider quite readable, might still be a deep dive for some of us! Enjoy!!

I will probably never learn cantillation (not that it wouldn’t be rewarding).

Our synagogue class recently advanced from prayer books (block letters, with vowels), to a Modern Hebrew textbook (script letters, no vowels). It felt so overwhelming at first to us, several of us considered dropping out of the class, but I’ve gotten to a point where it’s become enjoyable, and pleasantly satisfying learning to read Hebrew without vowels.

He lost me at “syntactic analysis!” [;)]

In all seriousness, he is a good writer, and the sample definitely is readable.

A silly note. Ta’am also can mean “taste” as well as “sense.” As in, that interpretation of the text leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I do think the approach is valuable and meaningful, but the Talmud has plenty of instances where the rabbinic schools had differing interpretations of a verse. Even today, it’s difficult for us to lay aside our supposedly correct interpretations and come together as one community.

I’ll refrain from saying more, at the risk of taking us off-topic, or crossing into some theological debate (not over his or your thoughts, but the state of things in general).