# הן תמומננה או תמומנה



## Nunty

טוב, הכותרת אומרת הכל. איך אני כותבת את זה: הן תמומננה או הן תמומנה? לדעתי, זה הראשון, אבל מרוב עיון בשתי האפשרוית כבר לא יודעת כלום. (מדובר במימון פרודוקציות והופעות) תודה! ​


----------



## bat777

איך שלא תסתכלי על זה- זו מילה זוועתית...
אין לי תשובה מלומדת בשבילך, אבל אני הייתי הולכת על *תמומנּה *- עם דגש חזק (אפילו בטקסט לא מנוקד) שמדגיש את ה-נ' שהושמטה. 
(נראה לי שאת יכולה לסמוך על זה שאף אחד ממילא לא יודע מה הכתיב הנכון פה...)
​


----------



## Nunty

ושוב תודה לך, בתשבע. (אני מניחה שאת צודקת. אני משתמשת במילה דווקא). 
​


----------



## Benjamin_

Nun-Translator said:


> הן תמומננה או הן תמומנה? לדעתי, זה הראשון



 No it’s the second one… In כתיב חסר there is a דגש but it turns out that it’s not written in כתיב מלא. 

  I have subscribed to מילון רב-מילים and it does a full grammatical analysis of words, giving the forms (here: עתיד, הן או אתן) and the corresponding כתיב מלא תקני : it’s תמומנה. 

  There is a simple way to verify this without having subscribed to רב-מילים : milon.morfix.co.il is actually the free version of the dictionary and does the analysis internally without showing it. If you enter תמומננה it says the word doesn’t exist, whereas if you enter תמומנה it returns the verb מומן.

  Hope this helps.


----------



## Nunty

Thank you, Benjamin. I'm going to write it with a dagesh since you and bat7 agree.


----------



## scriptum

bat777 said:


> איך שלא תסתכלי על זה- זו מילה זוועתית...


 
Absolutely. And is there any reason to use it at all? One may write "ימומנו": this verbal form is quite correct, and it sounds more normal...


----------



## bat777

scriptum said:


> Absolutely. And is there any reason to use it at all? One may write "ימומנו": this verbal form is quite correct, and it sounds more normal...


 
If I'm not mistaken, ימומנו is the masculine form of תמומנה . It's true that in spoken Hebrew masculine forms of this kind (in plural, not singular!) are used for both masculine qnd feminine usages, but in higher registers, the femine, with the ת in the beginning and the נה in the end, is the appropriate form to use. 

Other examples of masculine-feminie-singular-plural verbs, in which the feminine plural form is not used in the spoken language, are:

יכתוב-תכתוב-יכתבו-תכתובנה
ישמע-תשמע-ישמעו-תשמענה

So... however זוועתית the word תמומנּה is (probably due to the double נ, one from the root and the other from the suffix) it's the correct one...


----------



## scriptum

bat777 said:


> If I'm not mistaken, ימומנו is the masculine form of תמומנה . It's true that in spoken Hebrew masculine forms of this kind (in plural, not singular!) are used for both masculine qnd feminine usages, but in higher registers, the femine, with the ת in the beginning and the נה in the end, is the appropriate form to use.


I beg to differ. Historically, the forms הן תכתבנה and הן יכתבו belong to different epochs (the First and the Second temple). Both are equally correct. From modern Hebrew's point of view, the language of the Bible is no better than the language of the Mishna, and one cannot say that the biblical register is higher.


----------



## bat777

I cannot argue about the historical facts, simply because I don't know, but as a speaker of modern Hebrew, I know that יכתבו is only masculine and תכתבנה is feminie. 
What I'm trying to say is that I feel that there's a gap between what *is *correct and what *sounds* correct. In other words, it may be correct to use יכתבו for women, but to me it sounds wrong (In high registers, I mean, colloquially it's perfectly good). 
I would love to know what other Hebrew speakers feel about this.


----------



## Nunty

My preference is probably perfectly clear since I asked the question, but to be even clearer:

In everyday speech I'm as colloquial as anyone else, sometimes too much so. However, as a translator it is my job to match the register of my source text. Thus, in translating a high-register text I use high-register language in the translation.

But even beyond that, I am a feminist.   I see no reason to avoid the feminine form of the third person, plural future tense just because it's uncommon. Girls in קורסי טייס are uncommon, women CEOs are uncommon (at least in Israel), and the list is very, very long. That is no reason to avoid the possibility. Quite the contrary.

Language and culture are dancing partners. If one moves a bit, the other will surely follow.


----------



## scriptum

bat777 said:


> What I'm trying to say is that I feel that there's a gap between what *is *correct and what *sounds* correct. In other words, it may be correct to use יכתבו for women, but to me it sounds wrong (In high registers, I mean, colloquially it's perfectly good).


Bat777 - excuse me, but after all it was you who said:
איך שלא תסתכלי על זה- זו מילה זוועתית...
I only agreed with you.
Now you seem to contradict yourself.
Can a word sound correct and horrid at the same time?
I wonder...


----------



## scriptum

Nun-Translator said:


> But even beyond that, I am a feminist.  I see no reason to avoid the feminine form of the third person, plural future tense just because it's uncommon.


Without being a woman, I am a feminist, too. I see no reason to discriminate against women by using the feminine form, since there is a perfectly correct form common to both sexes.


----------



## Nunty

Bat777 will surely speak for herself, scriptum, but yes! A word can certainly sound (and be) correct and still look atrocious. The first has to do with being grammatically correct; the second, its צליל or aesthetic appearance. 

Hmmm... aesthetic orthography. I like it.


----------



## Nirshamay

:שלום לכולם​ 
.הצורה הנכונה במקרה הזה היא *תמומנּה*​ 
*.הדגש המשלים בלה"פ הוא תוצאה של הבלעת העיצור נ*​ 
:דוגמא נוספת לתופעת ההבלעה​ 
*טמננו->טמ*נּ*ו​ 
*,שיהיה לכולם יום טוב*​ 
*ניר*​


----------



## bat777

scriptum said:


> Bat777 - excuse me, but after all it was you who said:
> איך שלא תסתכלי על זה- זו מילה זוועתית...
> I only agreed with you.
> Now you seem to contradict yourself.
> Can a word sound correct and horrid at the same time?
> I wonder...


 
Nun Traslator spoke for me, so I don't need to speak for myself   . I agree with everything she wrote concerning grammaticality vs. sound, that's exactly what I ment to say.


----------

