Prev

I don’t see what motivates WLC’s a-note on this word.

I don’t see what motivates the a-note because the MPK has all the qere’s marks, as long as we interpret the MPK’s dot in the vav to be a shuruq dot not a dagesh.

The MPK suffix וּ֥ becomes ו֥וּ in the qere. In contrast, on closely-analogous words, gn27:29 and gn43:28 use a qubuts: וֻ֤ becomes ו֤וּ and וֻּֽ׃ becomes וּֽוּ׃ respectively.

BTW no shin dot is visible, although a shin dot might be hard to see here. The condition of the manuscript is not great here. The focus of the photograph is also not great here.