Re: [Hebrew] dagesh qal - special case question

>I assume "canonized" is the way the Massoretes did it. And they
>consistently made the difference between the naked nismakh form BIRK.AT
>(e.g. Gen.28:4) and the forms with personal suffixes BIRK_AT... (e.g.
>Gen.27:36). Unfortunately, there is not a single example with a 2nd person
>plural suffix (that is, with vowel change from Qamats to Patach before the
>two adjacent consonants) in the whole Hebrew Bible.

Are there any other words of the form B'RAXA that get a dagesh in the
contruct case?


-Joel
.