Possible Hebrew Database Error

[Adelphos]

In Jeremiah 42:6 in BibleWorks, we read in the kethib אֲנוּ

In both the Masoretic Text and in BHS the nun has a patach underneath it, which is of course an impossible word, which is obviously why a qere reading is supplied, nor does this word for "we" appear in its shortened form anywhere else in the Tanach.

In Aaron Dotan's transcription of the Leningrad Codex, this word has no points at all.

So in other words, the BibleWorks' rendition appears to be unique.

I know David and perhaps a few others are keeping up with the Hebrew database situation, so this may be of interest to you.

[bkMitchell]

In Jeremiah 42:6 in BibleWorks, we read in the kethib אֲנוּ
In both the Masoretic Text and in BHS the nun has a patach underneath it, which is of course an impossible word, which is obviously why a qere reading is supplied, nor does this word for "we" appear in its shortened form anywhere else in the Tanach...

Great find Adelphos!

I did find this topic to be of interest. So, I took a look at a few Hebrew Bibles to see what they had at this point.

The following widely used texts agree with having אֲֽנַ֜וְּ
1)The Jerusalem Crown: Keter Yerushalayim (pg. 467)
(2)BHS (pg 867)
(3)Rabbi M. Breuer's Tanakh( שנט or pg. 359 )
(3)Letteris (pg. 812)
(4)Norman Henry Snaith's Tanakh (Pg. 776)
(5)DavkaWriter


These three popular versions leaveאנו unpointed
(1) C.D. Ginsburg Tanakh (pg. 912)
(2) Koren Tanach (pg. 430)
(3) Adi (A. Dotan) Tanakh (pg. 712)
(4) The Stone Edition of the Tanach (pg. 1172)
(5)The JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh (pg. 1115)


TanakhML Project and the online Westinster Leningrad Codex 4.14 have אֲנַ֜חְנוּ in the the text with אנו as a subscript. however, both also display other choices. If you click on אֲנַ֜חְנוּ in the TanakhML it will open another page with variants.

Jeremiah 42:6 in some editions of the Hebrew Bible might prove hard to find because they may utilizes Hebrew letters as numbers. In Hebrew Jeremiah 42:6 might look something like this ספר ירמיה (the book of Jeremiah) then פרק מב (section 42) and ו (the number 6).

[Adelphos]

TanakhML Project and the online Westinster Leningrad Codex 4.14 have אֲנַ֜חְנוּ in the the text with אנו as a subscript. however, both also displace other choices.

So it looks like WMLC 4.14 contains the nun-patach, and I guess maybe the BibleWorks database is an earlier version which only gets updated as Westminster releases it periodically. At least they are aware of the variant, so that clears it up as far as that goes.

[bkMitchell]

So it looks like WMLC 4.14 contains the nun-patach, and I guess maybe the BibleWorks database is an earlier version which only gets updated as Westminster releases it periodically. At least they are aware of the variant, so that clears it up as far as that goes.

Yeah, I think that is correct BibleWorks version is 4.10 and the one on that site was 4.14. WMLC will always be a work in progress. In some areas there will always be new theories and new opinions about what the Leningrad Codex, original said or on if or not is should be corrected. They have better photographs of it, now.

Oh, and the http://www.tanach.us/Tanach.xml#Home web site allows access to previous versions of their online text(click here for previous version index).

The other Tanakh at http://tanakhml.org/
is similar.