Hi, Jasmin, The rule seems to be that if in the singular base word the letter in question has a vowel underneath it, then, in the plural the sheva is a sheva na. So, since the sing. is kelokel, with tsere under the kof, then the plural should be kelokelim. See: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://hebrew-academy.org.il/2013/09/01/**I-**G-**K/__;16LXmden16jXmdeq15XXqNeq15TXoNeZ16fXldeT!!KGKeukY!kfyp455q_TPBY6DDi9TdY5pTxdZfi2EiioJlp5K5FC7qtCWMurG2Lb2MsMFy_NzmQJio$ Hope this helps, Best, Barry
On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 11:29 PM Shinohara, Jasmin via Heb-naco < heb-naco@lists.osu.edu> wrote: > Hi, all, > > > > The above is found in a couple titles by Toviyah Rubner (and is cited from > him in the E.-Sh. entry for word). It has historically been romanized as > ḳeloḳelim. My question is, why is the sheva under the second kof > romanized as though it were a vocalized sheva? As a sheva merahef, wouldn’t > it be ignored and the word romanized ḳeloḳlim? > > > > Looking forward to your input. > > > > Thanks, Jasmin > > > > --- > > Jasmin Shinohara > > Hebraica Cataloging Librarian > > University of Pennsylvania > > 131 Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center > > 3420 Walnut Street > > Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206 > > T. 215-746-6397 > > jsh...@upenn.edu > > Coordinator, Hebraica BIBCO, NACO, & SACO Funnels > > > _______________________________________________ > Heb-naco mailing list > Heb-naco@lists.osu.edu > https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco >
_______________________________________________ Heb-naco mailing list Heb-naco@lists.osu.edu https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
