- This topic has 48 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Is there a word in davening that you always mispronounced and only recently learned the correct way?
bal gevuros and baal gevuros – where bal means the opposite no strength
Not exactly a mispronunciation, but I never seem to be able to get past v’koreiv pizureinu in YT mussaf without an “ay yanny, yay yay” right afterward. It’s just ingrained in my head.🤣
A chatof is a shvo that is hard to pronounce under letters ה, ח, א, ע. Therefore the stress is never under a chatof. The shem Hashem should be pronounced as most words and as required by dikduk at the end as indicated in the Nodah Beyehudah.
The shem א-לוה should be pronounced on the לו not at the end.
If you are a lifelong Ashkenaz and happened to find yourself in a Sehphardeshe shul for davening, there are certain words added in the kadish (already in Aramaic) that are real tounge-twisters that never seem to come out sounding the same way
The shem above א-לוה should be pronounced as ah and not ha at the end as the word גבוה.
Way too many shlichei tzibbur mispronounce Hakadosh Baruch Hu’s name. It is with a cholam (Adonai), not a cheerek (Adeenai).
I believe the tzibbur is not even allowed to answer Amen when it’s mispronounced.It’s noy, or nuhye not nai. If you are sefardi it is nai.
Laskern, are you saying that it is pronounced eLOkai?
Heard a baal tfilah chazunitzing on rosh chodesh “uminchasam veniskeihem kamidbaaaar” 🎶
Yes any —oy suffix in ashkenazy would be —–ay in sfaradi
Take3tomakmangos, Rabbenu Bechaye says that in סורו נא אדני by lot, nai is the plural which for ashkenazim’s pronounciation is incorrect. Yes the correct pronounciation is eLOah.
It’s not shihakol NÉE-HEE-YEH
It’s shihakol NEE-HEH-YEHbigdoil zroiacha YI-DMU…. not YID-MU. they have different meanings.
VA-YI-REU es Hashem va-yaaminu…not VA-YIR-U, they have different meanings.anonymous
its not SHIhakol its SHE-hakol. a segol under the shin not a chirikknaidlach, Thank you for pointing that out. The dagesh in the dalet changes the meaning from looks like to being still. The extra yud changes the meaning from seeing to fearing.
Ya, not that I do this wrong but worth noting, where you put the emphasis on ve’uhavtuh in K”S will dictate whether you’re yotzei acc. to R Shloime Miller. I think R Belsky held that it’s obviously better to do it correctly but not me’akev, though I don’t understand why, as mis-emphasizing changes the tense from future to past.
The big problem is inadvertently saying apikorsut. For example, in keriat shema saying that Hashem נשבה לאבותינו instead of נשבע. Those who have trouble with the “ch” sound say מקלקל עולם בהסד. See also Megilla 24b.
Mispronouncing a segol or a sheva as a chirik, as in “SHI-hakol” or “asher kidEEshanu” seems to be a uniquely American mistake – I have never heard an Israeli or a Brit say it like that.
Another bad mistake leading to an opposite meaning similar to “bal gevuros” is “oyev amo yisroel”, missing out the heh in oyHev.
It says המדקדק ק”ש באותיותה מצננין לו את הגהנם whoever watches out to pronounce krias shema properly, the gehanim will be cooled off for him.
Explains the Beis Yosef that he does things out of the ordinary, so Hashem also does things out of the ordinary as the gehinam is usually hot.I think the OP meant words where you actually mix up the letters or something. The trend of pronouncing the ayin the same as an aleph is so mainstream I don’t see the point of mentioning it as a “mistake.” It’s about 100 years too late to try to fix that.
I used to say “nigdol” in the lamnazeiach mizmor l’david every morning. Then, there was another one of these threads on the CR where are poster named papa bar abba mentioned he had made that mistake for years. That caused me to look in the siddur and realize that it’s actually nidgol and I had been saying it wrongly as well.
See the SA O”CH 61 and 62:1
often people say/sing beterem kol, yitzeer nivrah as opposed to beterem, kol yitzeer nivrah. pure kefirah sung with gustoh
You want apikursus? How about Boruch hu Elokeinu shebaranu lichvodo. That means we created Him C”v. Should be Sheb’ra’anu, that he created us for his honor.
And many medakdekim will pronounce the word nih’ye with a sheva nach in the middle, as a two syllable word, not as was mentioned higher up this thread. NO change in teitch there.
Or how about those that say “asher kiddyshanu,” There is a chirik chaser under the Kuf and a sheva na under the daled; not the opposite.To explain more, the gehinam is being cooled off because he does things against his nature, so Hashem also does things against its nature.
The sea split against its nature because Yosef escaped the wife of Potifar against his nature.It’s not Moshiach Tzidkecha; it’s Meshiach Tzidkecha
It’s not Hodu Al Eretz Vshamayim; it’s Hodo Al Eretz Vshamayim
It’s not Vtzadkeinu Bemishpot; it’s Vtzadkeinu BamishpotAs I was educated in this, I will give a little lesson for those who were not.
There are open and closed syllables. An over syllable can be extented forever, whereas a closed syllable can not. A closed syllable is either closed by shvo noch silent or a degash chazak which comes at the end of the syllable. There is also a dagesh kal in the beginning of a syllable in letters בגד כפת which after letters אהוי is omitted. There two kind of vowels, nekudos tenuah gedolos which have open syllables according the Magen Avraham O’CH 61 the siman is פתוחי חותם, a chirik followed by a yud, malipum a vov with a dot in the middle, tzere, cholem a vov with a dot on top and kometz. The rest are tenuah ketanos which have closed syllables. A shvo no follows a tenuah gedolah and a shvo noch a tenuah ketano. A letter having a degash chazak with a shvo, will be a shvo no. If above rules are violated the stress will be on it.Thank you midwestener for pointing that out. When we say it fast, we can make the mistake and not pronounce שבראנו correctly.
I forgot to define a degash chazak. It is like having duplicate letters in which the degash resides one with a shvo noch and the other with vowel on the letter.
Here are the most egregious ones I find most often (other than the first pasuk of k”sh as stated above):
Asher Baranu Lichvodo (see midwesterner above) (changes meaning from who created us to who we created)
Lishnei Ufur (as opposed to Lisheinei Ufur) in the second bruchu (changes from sleepers in the dust to two pieces of dust)
Hodoo al Eretz Veshumayim as opposed to Hoddo al eretz veshumayim (in psukei dezimra) (changes from his glory is over the heaven and earth to praise for heaven and earth)
Ki Lo CHAlu rachamecha instead of Ki Lo chaLU rachamecha (in modim) (changes meaning from because your mercy never ends to because your mercy never takes effect)midwesterner: Did you mean shva nach in your last line since chirik chaser is a tenua ketana? (Kid-shanu)
laskern: What about melupam vav as first letter in a word- is the shva after it na or nach? (uvchol)
I was unclear in saying an open syllable can be extended forever, so I will give an example the difference between רבי and רבים. The first is open and the second is closed. There is no closure in the length of pronounciation whereas in the second is closed by the ם. Also, since it is closed it violates the rule that a tenuah gedolah should be an open syllabe, so the stress is on it.
aishet chover, this is an argument, as I understand, between the GRA who holds it is a shvo noch and others.
laskern
yes there is an extra י in וייראו, plus the ר is a שבא נעlaskern
yes there is an extra י in וייראו, plus the ר is a שבא נע.VASHEM SHAMAYIM ASA. the word VASHEM is pronounced VA-DOI…not VA-A-DOI…
Aishet Chaver: There is a dagesh in the Daled of Kedishanu. That is a dagesh chazak as it is in the ayin hapoal of a binyan pi’el conjugation. A sh’va under a letter with a dagesh chazak is always na.
הרחמן הוא ישתבח לדור דורים ויתפאר בנו לעד ולנצח נצחים ויתהדר בנו לעד ולעולמי עולמים
both BANU are BAnu meaning: with us, not baNU meaning: they builtהן גאלתי אתכם….להיות לכם..
its laCHEM – to you. not LAchem – breadמשה ובני ישראל לך ענו שירה.
בוקע ים לפני משה זה קלי ענו ואמרו
its aNU – they answered, not Anu – us (we)to knaidlach and laskern:
You don’t necessarily need the extra yud. See for example Koheles 3:14. V’haElokim asah sheyir’u lefanav. Posuk is clearly referring to yir’ah as in fear, not r’iya as in seeing. Yet there is only one yud. Dagesh can fill the gap. and the sh’va is na.i mentioned earlier about BAnu in end of bentching.
in the regular way of singing the bentching its pronounced baNu in both. but as i said earlier it has a different meaning. (im sure you are singing it now lol)mitwestener. thank you for pointing it out.
I know it’s not exactly davening, but is it “dizban abba b’srei zuzai” or “dizaben abba b’srei zuzai, chad gadya, chad gadya”? I’ve seen/heard both versions.
WinnieThePooh, I can personally confirm that I was bought, not sold, and thus the correct pronunciation is “dizvan”.
Kind regards,
ChadGadya
Thanks laskern.
However, a shuruk, also known as a kubutz (the three diagonal dots underneath) can sometimes be a tenuoh gedoloh as well, in lieu of the melopum, as in the word mezuzos in the shema. The clue is that it is an unstressed open syllable.
A chirik without a yod can also sometimes be a tenuoh gedoloh. This occurs for example when the word “im” in a posuk has a cantillation mark, as opposed to being hyphenated (makaf). This is similar to the difference between “es” and “eis”. For example in hallel “im nedivim im nedivei amo” – the first im is hyphenated and is a tenuoh ketanoh, while the second is accented and is a tenuoh gedoloh, and should properly be pronounced “eem” – slightly longer than “im”.
HoDO al eretz v’shamayim
not
HOdu al eretz v’shamayim
Meno, mentioned above by besalel.
Outside of davenen we find the Rashi on ורחל באה מן הצאן the pronounciation in the beginning or the end changes the meaning, where the Even Ezra clearly explains that the beginning is past and the end is current.
Oh.
So here’s another:
l’ma’an tizk’ru
not
l’ma’an tisk’ru
Did anyone say that one yet?
Meno, mentioned in SA O’CH 61:17
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.