Karl, in the last part of your post you write:
"Do you know of any other examples of a verb listed in dictionaries with a consonant, waw, tau, which conjugate in qatal hiphil without the medial yod and without a second tau where normal conjugation calls for one? Absent being able to show a pattern from ......" Please what does "qatal hiphil" mean? Maybe by "qatal" you mean what I call "past"? Regards from Pere Porta 2011/4/20 K Randolph <[email protected]> > Pere: > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Pere Porta <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Good spanner, Karl. >> >> I think the likelihood is 100 %. >> > > 100% what? > > >> You will ask why, of course. >> >> Remark: >> >> 1. In 1S 17:51 we deal with the so called "polel". This is called "polel" >> because of the doubling of the L, namely the third (or last) root consonant >> of every stem. >> > > This is also a yiqtol, so this doesn’t answer your question, yes or no. > > >> Polels -and also Hithpolels- double every last consonant, be it T or >> not. >> There are plenty of examples: in Jb 30:20 we have "wa-titbonen", and you >> will understand (doubling of N), from "byn" (Dn 10:1); "sorer", he turned >> aside (Lm 3:11), from "swr", to turn aside (Is 7:17) ; "uml'lw", they were >> feeble (Jr 14:2), from "amal", be feeble... >> > > )ML is never found in Tanakh, it is always found as )MLL which has led me > to question, is this one of the few verbs that is a quadriliteral verb? > >> >> 2. In 2Ch 22:11 we haven't a "doubled tau". Yes, from a material point of >> view there are two taus, yes. But the second tau is but the heh suffix of >> the feminine 3rd person singular, which heh becomes tau in the "construct". >> The same, for instance, as in birkaty, my blessing (Is 44:3), from b'rakah, >> blessing (Js 15:19). >> > > Exactly, which is why when I look at Numbers 17:6, I expect to see HMTTM > for MWT with a second person plural suffix. > > I realize now that I misstated what I meant, and what I meant was that in 2 > Chronicles 22:11, there is the classic, normal conjugation expected for the > context, with a second tau, not the defective one proposed for Numbers 17:6. > > Again, in 2 Samuel 1:9, 16, while these are not hiphils, they are > conjugated from MWT where the second tau is the normal conjugation suffix > for the use and context. > >> >> 3. Now, you're right that HMM has HMTM for the Qal Past, 2nd person plural >> masculine: look at Js 6:3 (1st word in the verse): it is from "sabab" (Ez >> 42:19) >> > > HWM also has HMTM for the qatal qal 2nd pers plural. > >> >> With all this, maybe you should review again the stuff. >> >> >> Pere Porta >> >>> >>> Maybe you should update your terminology, as Biblical Hebrew did not have > tense, i.e. past, present, future. Modern Israeli Hebrew does, but that’s a > language that I don’t know. Because the qatal and yiqtol did not act the > same way as tenses do in Indo-European languages, I call them “qatal” and > “yiqtol” so as not to confuse the ideas. > > Do you know of any other examples of a verb listed in dictionaries with a > consonant, waw, tau, which conjugate in qatal hiphil without the medial yod > and without a second tau where normal conjugation calls for one? Absent > being able to show a pattern from other verbs that act the same way, why > should I not read it according to normal Biblical Hebrew patterns and assign > different roots to these two examples than MWT? Especially when these > different roots have meanings consistent with their contexts? > > Karl W. Randolph. > -- Pere Porta _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
