Zarka vs. tsinnorit in Exodus 36:2 #109
Description
I've been experimenting with the MapM text today to see if I can help with Noleli/trop-analysis#10. The code in that repository happens to include a consistency check for whether the cantillation marks it finds include any instances of tsinnorit. After handling the fact that MapM uses tsinnorit (a.k.a. Unicode "zarqa") for the accented syllable of milra words where there's a postpositive zarka (a.k.a. Unicode "zinor"), this still had one hit on Exodus 36:2:
וַיִּקְרָ֣א מֹשֶׁ֗ה אֶל־בְּצַלְאֵל֘
This surely isn't a real tsinnorit, so the only reason I can think of why it would be present would be so that the cantillation mark doesn't collide with the head of the lamed, even though that seems as though it should just be a rendering consideration. But the rendered text of this verse on WikiSource has a normal postpositive zarka instead:
וַיִּקְרָ֣א מֹשֶׁ֗ה אֶל־בְּצַלְאֵל֮
The MapM spreadsheet does show variants for Exodus 36:2, but they're between אֶל־בְּצַלְאֵל֮ (with postpositive zarqa) and אֶל־בְּצַלְאֵ֘ל (with tsinnorit on the alef). The documentation note refers to another note on Exodus 30:11. As far as I understand that note, it says that there is an irregular manuscript form here where the zarka appears to be before the lamed and not after it, but they observe that this is only because the head of the lamed means that the zarka cannot extend to the left, and that there is "no place" to copy this irregular form to the digital edition.
I notice that Exodus 30:11 in MAPM.xml here has a zarka as I'd expect, so I think the accentuation of Exodus 36:2 may be a mistake in the edition found here (perhaps just due to using an older version of the MapM text). Does this make sense to you? Thanks!