Talk:Hebrew cantillation

Italian synogogue in NY
The article mentions an Italian synogogue in NY, anyone know of this?

Hebrew naming conventions
Urgent: see Naming conventions (Hebrew) to add your opinions about this important matter. Thank you. IZAK 18:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

The musical function
The old Sephardic tradition, represented amongst others by the Syrian, Egyptian, Moroccan, Italian and Spanish/Portuguese melody, is widely used in its Moroccan variety both in Israel and in the diaspora among descendants of immigrants from that country.
 * Um- which country? from Morocco? I'm confused.  - Eric 02:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I added a note to Suzanne_Haïk-Vantoura reconstruction from The Music of the Bible Revealed. It is a huge topic which not much material has been published about. But it is a complete musical work of the entire Tanach. --Aviwollman (talk) 06:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Chart
None of the symbols seem to show up in the chart, yet they look fine here: &#1445; &#1435; &#1445; &#1430; &#1425; &#1443; &#1428; &#1430; &#1469; Is it because of the nature of the symbols as superscript and subscript? I'll try to find a solution to this. --OneTopJob6 23:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Qur'an
According to the page for Qur'an, cantillation is also often used in recitations of that text. If that is in fact the case, I think a section needs to be added to this page to elaborate on it. QuinnHK 04:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

If cantillation is in use in other cultures, then perhaps this page should be moved to something like "Jewish Cantillation" and the "Cantillation" page be a much shorter general discussion of the prevalence, relevance and historical context of the practice, with short sections on specific cultures and links to "Jewish Cantillation" and a new "Islamic Cantillation" page or an anchor section within Qur'an. That page does not currently appear to mention cantillation. Can you provide a reference? Was it deleted at some point? CaptainLepton (talk) 09:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree that the page should be called Cantillation(Jewish), and Cantillation (Islamic) should redirect to a page called "Tarteel." 24.46.207.111 (talk) 18:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Torah portion
Torah portion does not belong on this page; it's irrelevant (and too long btw).&mdash;msh210 &#x2120; 19:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi msh: (1) Cantillation is the unique way the weekly Torah reading of the Parsha (Torah portion) is "read/sung" in synagogue on Mondays and Thursdays during Shacharit services, and notably in the services on Shabbat. (2) The template Torah portion is at the bottom of the Cantillation article's page, so essentially it's part of the "See also" section which is a legitimate way of connecting related and connected topics on an article. (3) If a reader finds the Torah portion to be "too intrusive" then any reader is free to click "Hide" on the top right section of the template's heading which shrinks it to an unobtrusive one liner. Finally, (4) the Torah portion is presently diligently updated weekly by User:Dauster early each Sunday so that any readers may learn more about the weekly Parsha. User:Dauster summarizes each week's Parsha and adds some interesting graphics which surely adds life and color to a page that may gain the attention of readers who don't know much about this subject and may want to learn more. Please refer all further comments and discussions to one centralized location at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism Thank you. IZAK 06:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

trope v trop
Both spellings exist. Google returns c.300,000 hits for "trop+Hebrew" and c.100,000 for "trope+Hebrew", so it seems "trop" is the more common. Therefore, I'd suggest both should be referred to at the start of the article, but trop should be the more commonly used. --Dweller 10:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as my experience in the Orthodox communities in the UK and Israel is that this is always pronounced with a Yiddish-accented ʃrɒp ("tropp"), "trop" is better to avoid confusion with troʊp ("trope"). CaptainLepton (talk) 09:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Trope (music)
See discussion of proposed merge of Trope (music) with Cantillation at Talk:Trope (music). Hyacinth 09:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be nothing to merge; every aspect for the information from Trope (music) is contained in the article here with the exception of observation that it is possible to hear "variants in the same synagogue by different readers."

I've referred Trope (music) to Cantillations. The previous content at Trope (music) was:

from Trope (music)
In Jewish liturgy, tropes are musical phrase contours (cantillations) which are applied to the words of a sacred text during public readings. It also refers to the markings in some copies of those text to indicate the vocalization.

It is not known whether trope developed from a single form used in the ancient Temple. Following the destruction of the Temple and the dispersion of the Jews, diverse trope systems have developed regionally. As Jews continue to move about the world, it is possible to hear these variants in the same synagogue by different readers.

Different trope apply to different parts of Tanakh (the books that largely overlap with what is referred to by Christians as "the Old Testament"). Within any regional tradition, there are different trope for Torah (first five books of the Bible), versus Haftorah (Neve'im or "Prophets" (e.g Isaiah)), or various "megillot" or scrolls used on particular occasions, such as the reading of Esther at Purim.

Within Judaism, the standard accepted text of Tanakh is the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Words in the Masoretic Text contain three sections: the letters (consonants), vowel points, and trope. These cantillation marks are called te'amim in Hebrew, and the markings are standard, even though the pitch contours they represent to the reader may differ.

The trope are not random strings but follow a set and describable grammar. For more information, refer to [Jacobson, Joshua. Chanting the Hebrew Bible: the art of cantillation. 2002.] Nearly Human 17:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Integrate "Meanings" into chart?
why only the lithuanian names ? (mercha,tipcha etc) instead of the more international names for the tropes Maarikh tarkha,shophar holech etc

Looks like a good idea. All it's doing now is taking up extra space. --OneTopJob6 03:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid that what you call "Lithuanian" are the universal Ashkenazi names; maarich, tarcha etc. are purely Sephardic, and the Italians have different names again. I do sympathize (I'm Sephardi myself), but the general convention for resources of pan-Jewish interest is to use the Ashkenazi names.  For example, the Ashkenazi names are used in all Hebrew grammars (Davidson, Gesenius, Weingreen etc.) and even in the Keter Shem Tob of that fine Sephardi rabbi Shem Tob Gaguine.  This is an oddity (grammars follow Sephardi conventions in all other matters), but it may be explained by the fact that ta'amim were first explained to a Christian audience by Reuchlin, who lived in Germany.


 * I do agree with merging the two tables, but I do not have the technical expertise to do so myself. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 10:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Almost all study cantillation study-tools published in Israel today give the student all the options for the names of the teamim, according to all communities. Of course the chart should include the Sephardic names, and anyone who wants to update it is welcome! Dovi 18:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not against this. However, it will then be impossible to incorporate into the table the explanations of the meanings of the names, as each ta'am will have more than one name. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 21:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It shouldn't be so much of a problem to construct the chart in a way that shows the various names for each ta'am and explains them. Especially if it is primarily organized in terms of different levels of dividers and joiners, as it should be, rather than by name. Dovi 11:19, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm strongly against the merge. The result would be hopelessly cluttered and confusing.--R613vlu 23:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

"Coda" motif?
Are we talking about the descent to D (where Ashk. Torah is in F major, and Seph. Torah is in E1/2b Siga, Ashk. Haftara in d minor, Seph. Haftara in G Nawa)? I'm not even sure the "coda" is significant in the melodies, but then again, the term is pretty poorly defined. --OneTopJob6 12:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of the English modes. In Western Ashkenazi, every Torah reading ends with C C B A top-A E, C C D E D A (in A minor), while every verse of the haftarah ends A F E D E D C C bottom-G A.  The final verse of the haftarah ends A F E D E D C C D E top-G F.  In the Spanish and Portuguese mode, every Torah reading ends D G G G G E E D E G E D (in D Rast), and every verse of the haftarah ends with D E D C B D D E D A B C B A (in A minor).  I am not acquainted with the Lithuanian melody, and have left a note on the page asking anyone who knows to contribute. As I remember, Syrian Torah readings do indeed descend to D (something like E D E F E D, with E half a tone flat throughout), and I am not sure about haftarah.  The basic point is that, in all these reading/verse endings, there is a tune which overrides the normal value of the taamim. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 09:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

'leyen'
I would think that a Yiddish word would more likely be related to the German 'lesen' than the less similar Latin 'legere'. Yiddish is not a Latinate language at all, and is mostly German. I don't know if I'm pushing any buttons by saying that, but in the interest of scholarly accuracy... Too bad there isn't any reference for that claim. Linguistica (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. But lesen itself was a Romance loan word, with its roots in 'legere'. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 17:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

History - Old Babylonian
Does Old Babylonian refer to Old Babylonian/Old Assyrian — 1950 – 1530 BCE? Where is it sourced from?--mrg3105 (comms) If you're not taking any flak, you're not over the target. 02:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No. It meant Babylonian-Jewish, of the period of the Geonim, c. 8th - 10th century CE.  The point is that, in addition to the Tiberian system of accentuation and vowel notation we have today, there were formerly Babylonian (in the sense I have just defined) and Palestinian systems, which were superseded by the Tiberian system by the 12th century. (The Yemenites carried on using the Babylonian system a little longer.) The source for the Babylonian cantillation letters is Kahle, Masoreten des Ostens. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 10:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * A remark along the same subject: I recognize that in the Babylonian system there were eight different letters in representing the disjunctive accents. However, for example, depending on the Babylonian manuscript you look at, a 'v', an upside-down 'v', or possibly others represents the athnach, a disjunctive accent that would no doubt be represented in Yemenite Hebrew. The first fact about the eight different letters and the eight different disjunctive motifs seems misleading to me because there are symbols besides the eight letters that represent important disjunctives as well in the Babylonian system. Any clarification or explanation would be appreciated.

Syrian Origin For Yerushalmi Tradition
Is there any proof that Yerushalmi is a direct decendant of Syrian system? sure it uses maqam sikah (as does turkish,As does Greek,As does Egyptian,As do karaites) but the tropes dont correspond one on one or even closely to the Paterns of Ajnas, If anything Yerushalmi is Closer to turkish System, also does anyone know the origin of the "barkai SYrian" system? Thanx --74.72.241.193 (talk) 05:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Zohar


 * For some time (certainly since the mid-nineteenth century) the Turkish, Syrian, Jerusalem and Egyptian musical traditions have formed a continuum; despite the diverse backgrounds (Arab for the Syrians; Spanish for the Turkish and Jerusalem communities) these were all overlaid with the general "Ottoman" musical system. However, the Jerusalem tradition (not only in cantillation, also in baqashot etc.) was strongly influenced by the Aleppo immigrants in 1850 and again in 1900, and the present "Jerusalem-Sephardic" tradition, while it is an amalgam of all the Ottoman systems, has a strong Syrian element.  I have not done a detailed comparison of the cantillation systems; in some ways Syrian retains a resemblance to Baghdadi, which is outside this continuum and more purely Arab.  I'd be very pleased if someone contributed more detailed information.  By "barkai", do you mean the more elaborate system for Torah cantillation? --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 09:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Remove the crap from external links
The external links category is full of spam. Some of the links are in the wrong section for example the temani link. (Which I found very helpful.) 89.138.123.192 (talk) 17:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * If you find a mistake please fix it. To the best of my knowledge, all of the links are to helpful material. Dovi (talk) 03:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sound isn't Trop
The recording there isn't trop- it's a bracha before leining (as it says) and doesn't follow this (or any) cantillation system. Anyone want to replace it?YosefK (talk) 02:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

"Vandalism"
See wp:no self references and wp:neutral point of view.

Wp:head states that headings are noun phrases.Curb Chain (talk) 00:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

link rot
"Wikimedia Commons: Free content audio recordings of cantillation at the Wikimedia Commons are listed at category:Cantillation and/or category:Jewish cantillation." The link goes to a page that says it's been moved; change it to point only to the right place. 2. Hebrew University Oral Tradition site gives the dread 404 message. 4.249.96.244 (talk) 22:36, 19 January 2012 (UTC)==

Confusing information on Suzanne Haik-Vontura
I am "layperson" and I find this subject so confusing and these article don't help much either. I am confused did Suzanne succeed in deciphering the ta'amim? or was her work only a theory? Mr. John Wheeler presents some evidence Suzanne was right yet scholar Joshua Jacobson said Suzanne has all wrong, and I do not know why. This article's mention is too brief and her article on wiku gives the impression Suzanne did indeed rediscovered the musical value of the ta'amim. Which is it? Any scholar here to break--Anaccuratesource (talk) 04:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC) it down?

A--Anaccuratesource (talk) 04:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)lso the article discusses much differing Jewish chants but nothing on Samaritan chants.

Eichah/Lamentations
We should make some reference to the fact that, in Ashkenazi tradition, Eichah has two seperate methods of cantilation: 1 for chapter 3 and 1 for the remainder of the book. I am not sure whether this should be considered a 7th style of trop, or simply a subsection of the eichah category, but it deserves a mention. g.j.g (talk) 05:21, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

More to Names in different traditions Section
Dear page editors, the maqqaf, מַקַּף, shouldn't be added to this table? Cheers.

--Connection (talk) 20:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

link rot
The 613.org website no longer exists. 71.163.117.143 (talk) 14:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

tifcha (f) meant where tipfcha (pf) appears?
This is in the table.

Also, in the corresponding Hebrew, was tifcha meant where tipcha appears, i.e. was fe meant where pe appears, i.e. was no dagesh meant where the dagesh appears? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdenckla (talk • contribs) 18:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it is the other way round. The name Tipcha contains a dagesh -- at least in R' Breuer's book on cantillation -- and should be transliterated Tipcha.--Lantani (talk) 12:05, 19 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantani (talk • contribs)


 * if the dagesh follows a short vowel in a closed unaccented vowel wouldn't that daghesh be Hazaq, further any letter that has a daghesh and a shewa that shewa is na` so either it does have a daghesh and its tippecha or it doesn't have a daghesh and it's tifcha but Tipcha seems like an imposibility to me


 * Yes, it is "tippecha" with dagesh chazaq and shwa na`. See Price's and Beuer's book.--Lantani (talk) 12:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantani (talk • contribs)
 * Addendum: A very similar for is the feminine perfective pi`el of טפח in Is.48:13. (BTW: why does SineBot declare my signed contributions unsigned?)--Lantani (talk) 22:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantani (talk • contribs)

All that is very fine and dandy, but the problem is that טפח in this context is not a verb and therefore cannot have a pi'el. It is a segolate noun "tefach", meaning a hand's breadth (probably an allusion to a hand signal to the reader). The same word in Aramaic would indeed come out as "tifcha", ending with "alef". The pronunciation "tipcha" is simply a mistake, and "tippecha" is an unconvincing attempt to rationalize it. If it meant anything, it would be "she (intensively) hand's-breadthed", and then it would have to end with "he". --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 12:21, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * If "Tipcha" is a mistake, it has become common enough among Ashkenaz Jews that it has crept into many books including the one of Rav Breuer Z"L which I consider particularly reliable. A Yemenite Jew living in Israel whom I asked for clarification yesterday answered that "Tipcha" is the most frequent term among Ashkenazim, "Tarcha" among Sefardim, and "Tifcha" among Yemenites. The name "Netuyah" in the table of names appeared strange to him.--Lantani (talk) 21:13, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Ashkenazic names
The Ashkenazic names are not transcribed in Ashkenazic Hebrew. This should be fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yak314 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that's just an academic convention, used in all or most Hebrew grammars. The te'amim have their Ashkenazi names because the first Christian scholar to devote detailed attention to them was Johannes Reuchlin, who was German. But the names are transliterated in Sephardic because that is what is done with all other grammatical terms. I know it's illogical but there it is. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 14:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Missing translation
טעמי המקרא can someone give the literal explanation of the phrase please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giftzwerg 88 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The literal translation would be "tastes of the Bible"! But here "ta'am" is being used in the metaphorical sense of "sense", as in what is needed for a passage to make sense; it can sometimes even mean "reason". So normally we just say "Biblical accents". --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 14:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Meaning of Geresh
The article gives as meaning of Geresh: "'Expulsion, driving out'. Reason not clear."

I do not know the reason, but could it be that the punctuation Geresh, i.e. the apostrophe-like sign to show the place where letters have been "driven out", has its name from there, and the cantillation sign Geresh has its name from its form which resembles the punctuation Geresh? --Lantani (talk) 12:16, 19 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantani (talk • contribs)
 * I doubt it, said the Carpenter. I think the use of "geresh" for an apostrophe came long after the ta'am. As for why the ta'am is so called, I don't know: it's generally quite a long series of notes, so it may mean an expulsion of breath. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 12:10, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of the Yemenite column...
I propose temporary deletion of (until someone knowledgeable will work on) the Yemenite column in the table at Cantillation. So many details in it are plainly absurd and wrong. To put it mildly, it's a sad joke. Is there even one editor here that can take it seriously? If so please comment, because from שִׁישְׁלָ֓א and צִנּוֹר֮ to תַּבְרָ֛א and תְּ֠לִישָא גְדוֹלָה, there is absolutely no Yemenite source. I'm literally dumbfounded to see gibberish like this (shishla?!) enshrined and passed off as Yemenite in a generally reliable encyclopedia.

Why deletion? Because the way it is now is beyond disgraceful--more appropriate for a joke book than encyclopedia--and if there is no one here with sources to adduce to justify the chart as a whole (and like I said there are no Yemenite sources), it belongs in a sandbox/history until the time someone knowledgeable is ready to post the correct facts (preferably with accompanying citations which could have prevented this from happening to begin with). I'm as unhappy as the next person (possibly more unhappy) to see the Yemenite section go without mention here (if I had the time I'd work on it myself), but better nothing than a misleading table that badly needs to be reworked and, as it is now, only serves to reflect and impart egregious ignorance of the Yemenite tradition.

If there's anyone interested in sources you can start with one of the following
 * מלמדי תינוקות ודרכי הלימוד (Hebrew), beginning on page 50 in Rabbi Yosef Qafih's Halichoth Teiman (1963).
 * נקוד, טעמים ומסורת בתימן (Hebrew) in Rabbi Yosef Qafih's Collected Papers, volume 2, pages 931-936.
 * אלף בי (Hebrew): A popular Yemenite alaph bei book.

Don't take all the negativity above the wrong way (it's not directed at any individual). It just pains me to see the t'amim in the Yemenite tradition distorted beyond recognition as they are now. I think waiting a month until February is more than enough time for notice, but if anyone wants to go ahead with deletion sooner I'm not opposed. Sigh. Contributor613 (talk) 14:38, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Deleted. Contributor613 (talk) 02:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your this action. I am involved in the German articles on the teamim and this artcles contain the Yemenite Spellings taken from the English article. I also had some serious doubts about the Yemenite spellings and I will do so in all other cases as well. In every case there might only be few readers of enwiki or dewiki who find the Yemenite versions usefull for understanding the teamim in general. All others will not even realize, there might something be missing.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 16:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Zarka tables
I'd suggest replacing the Askenazi Zarqa table with something more accurate. I found this one, unfortunately only on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9Nxsix2-Xo What makes it more accurate: (a) zakef katan and zakef gadol have a maqaf (hyphen) to join them into single words. That's especially important for zakef gadol, which by definition is only allowed on a single word. (b) same with tlisha ketanah and gedolah: they should be joined into a single word with a maqaf. In addition, the ta'amim for them are in the wrong places: tlisha always goes all the way to the left or right of the word(s) involved, and not over the accented syllable. The syllable(s) they currently appear on aren't even the right one(s), as anyone who teaches this trope (AFAIK) sings the note on the very last syllable of the second word, tlisha gedola-a-a-a-a-ah.

This is certainly like the list I was trained on, and like most of the lists I see in chumashim: with all the notes in their proper places on the words that are their names. MikeR613 (talk) 14:58, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah - I should have looked there first. https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/טעמי_המקרא#/media/File:TAMI_MIKRA_ASHKENAZ.svg is a good one. How do I add it instead of the current one? MikeR613 (talk) 17:02, 19 April 2018 (UTC) - Okay, switched it. MikeR613 (talk) 17:12, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Hmm - doesn't look as good as the old one, though it is more accurate. If anyone knows how to make it match with the Sefardi version (same size, nice border), please do it, thanks. MikeR613 (talk) 17:14, 19 April 2018 (UTC). - Okay, figured it out and fixed it. MikeR613 (talk) 17:16, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cantillation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120119150730/http://vineofdavid.org/remnant_repository/ezekiel_margoliouth/ to http://vineofdavid.org/remnant_repository/ezekiel_margoliouth/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:10, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cantillation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://hazzan.qpon.co.il/Front/Multimedia/albom.asp?mBoundary=11371&aType=3
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719054230/http://pizmonim.org/text/PAGE%2099-II.pdf to http://pizmonim.org/text/PAGE%2099-II.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120605211304/http://www.urjbooksandmusic.com/product.php?productid=152 to http://www.urjbooksandmusic.com/product.php?productid=152

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Examples off topic
The two audio examples at the top of this article, the Torah blessing and Amar Rabbi Elazar, are not examples of Cantillation as defined in the lede. Ideally they should be replaced by the real thing. In the meantime should they be kept?--agr (talk) 14:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Purpose of cantillation
I would like to modify the section on Purpose, as I think the following is definitely wrong: "A primary purpose of the cantillation signs is to guide the chanting of the sacred texts during public worship... The cantillation signs also provide information on the syntactical structure of the text..." Both parts of this need to be fixed. The first part is just wrong, and the second part misleading.

The first part: every part of Tanach (the Hebrew bible) is cantillated, every word. But only a small fraction - the Chumash (five books of Moses), some sections of Prophets here and there for Haftorah, and the five Megillos - are read during public worship. There is even a unique different cantillation for Job, Proverbs, Psalms - see the chapter here on them - none of which are ever read in public worship at all. So that cannot be correct. Rather, as Rav Mordechai Breuer z"l points out in his Taamei Hamikra (see Bibliography), it is a Talmudic tradition that all Torah should be learned with a melody, whether the Tanach or the oral parts like the Mishnah. So a much more likely suggestion made by Breuer, is that the cantillation is to provide a melody for studying the Torah, even privately. [A few parts of the Torah even have separate cantillations for public and private reading ("taam elyon" and "taam tachton"), according to many customs.]

The second part is maybe correct, but misleading. As Breuer again points out, for the purpose of syntactic division, you wouldn't need a couple of dozen cantillation symbols: he says five would suffice. Most of the rules of cantillation are clearly results of its musical purpose. However, being competent, the cantillation follows the grammar of the Hebrew sentence. You want your song to follow the commas and semicolons, not stop or flow in the wrong places. As a result, you can see a syntactical division of each sentence according to its cantillation - as a happy side-effect. It is misleading to call it a purpose. You see in the detailed rules of cantillation that this syntactical division gives way in many places to the main musical purpose. I'll give two examples of literally dozens from Breuer or any of the classical sources: Segol is found only in the first half of a verse, never the second half. Unlike almost any other taam, two revias are never found close together; instead, the later revia changes into a different taam. These kinds of rules make sense musically [unfortunately, since we don't know how they sounded we aren't in a position to know exactly why], but are very hard to justify on any syntactical or grammatical grounds.

The same problem but worse is found in the section titled Function... - it makes the musical function seem secondary to the syntax; that's just backwards.

None of this is original research, it's all sourced from Breuer. MikeR613 (talk) 13:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Meaning of "revia"
About:

Revia "Quarter" or "fourth", probably because it splits the half verse from the start to etnachta (or etnachta to the end) into quarters (as it ranks below zaqef, the        main division within the half verse). Other possibilities are that it came fourth in the zarqa table (in the current Ashkenazi table it comes fifth) or that it was regarded as occupying the fourth level in the hierarchy.[17] Its apparent appro- priateness to the square or diamond shape of the symbol is coincidence: in most manuscripts, it is simply a point.

Sorry, but all of that is just plain wrong, castles in the air built upon a misconception that has persisted for indeed a long time (I don't know how long exactly, but I am thinking that a century or two would be a rather conservative estimate).

The cantillation name "revia" has nothing to do with the number four, or a fourth, or a quarter, or anything along those lines. Rather, "revia" is an Aramaic word meaning "lying down" (i.e., horizontally positioned). This can be very clearly seen in the Targum of Onkelos at Shemot 23:5, where the Hebrew רֹבֵץ תַּחַת מַשָּׂאוֹ (referring to a donkey brought low by its burden) is translated to Aramaic as רְבִיעַ תְּחוֹת טֻעְנֵיהּ. That a cantillation mark would have such a name is entirely consistent with the names of various other marks in the same list that are also Aramaic (or of apparent Aramaic derivation), and have meanings that refer to the position of a body at rest or in motion. E.g., "pashta" (stretched out), "qadma" (advancing), "mahpach" (turning, or turned), "munach" (resting). And so, then, "revia" -- lying down.

This error is compounded yet further in the great multitude of chumashim -- many very highly regarded (by the masses, at least) for accuracy -- in which the cantillation mark "revia" (in the list of cantillation marks that appears at the front or the back of the chumash) has been renamed "revi'i". What happened, evidently, is that the proofreaders or printers, many (or most?) of whom knew Hebrew reasonably well, but knew little or no Aramaic, "corrected" what they considered an error, "revia" (a very unfamiliar Aramaic word) to what they imagined it was supposed to be, "revi'i" (a very familiar Hebrew word). And so the misconception and the error have been perpetuated down to our day, even in some of the "best" chumashim -- and show little hope of being rectified any time soon. Toddcs (talk) 01:22, 18 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Now fixed. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 17:05, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Notice of related discussion
A discussion related to this page is underway at Articles for deletion/Trope (religion). Ibadibam (talk) 05:47, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Alphabets in Wikipedia
I don't get why the Semitic Alphabets have one shared set of articles, each one of a group of parallel letters from different writing systems. The absurd is that the small things, that are unique to one alphabet and for a minor use today, are represented one by one here, while the Hebrew Wikipedia stayed back in this subject. הראש (talk) 00:17, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

History section uses conflicting terms for the second system
The opening paragraph of the History section says, "the Babylonian, the Palestinian and the Tiberian, only the last of which is used today." The three subheadings under History are "Babylonian system", "Israelite system", and "Tiberian system".

Should the second system be called Palestinian or Israelite? The name used in the opening paragraph and in the subheadings needs to match for clarity of reading. If both names are appropriate, then we should either list both (e.g. "Palestinian/Israelite system) or pick one for the text and note the alternate name in the body under the subheading. AristosM (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

The 3-colour graphic differentiating the diacritics
The graphic shown on the main page shows a verse of Hebrew text in which the letters and the two sets of diacritics are visually differentiated by colour. The letters are in black, the vocalisation points are in red and the cantillation marks are in blue. It seems to have originated in a word processor from which a screen shot was taken to produce the graphic. Does anyone know which word processor was used to set the characters in those three colours and if there is a way to reproduce that in Microsoft Word or by some other means? To clarify the question, there is a setting in Word where you can specify a colour for diacritics, which can differ from the colour of the base letters, but there does not seem to be any way to get it to use two different colours for two ranges of diacritics. --Moongazer29.53 (talk) 14:35, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Dating
Would be really beneficial if the article could provide some historical dates to ground the time periods involved in the historical discussion. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C50:6200:98C:2DC7:6175:4CCB:5A7E (talk) 03:24, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Please split!
Most of this articles' content is not about cantillation but about the Teamim  it is based on. These two should be demarcated against each other. --Vollbracht (talk) 13:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

The Psalms, Proverbs and Job section needs citations
The Psalms, Proverbs and Job section needs citations Jay Schro (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Who is who?
The text says, under "In Christian missionary uses":

The Jewish-born Christian convert Ezekiel Margoliouth...

But in the biography of Margoliouth, the translator and orientalist, says that the father was Ezekiel ("His father, Ezekiel...) and the son was David Samuel Margoliouth. 2001:9E8:BA84:1E00:D192:486B:8AEF:40C8 (talk) 13:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)