Pere: On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Pere Porta <[email protected]> wrote:
> From the viewpoint of form, there is a verbal form, not a noun. > In my list of about 9,000 patterns, I found none that being the sum of > prefix TW- + two root consonants is a noun. And I say this of both prefixes > TW- and T + qubbuts. > This said, this pattern TW + two root consonants can be: > > 1. From verbs p"y, as Karl suggests ------ see Gn 15:15; Am 7:10; Ps > 45:15 > As a verbal form, can be either niphal or hophal. > 2. From verbs ayin"waw (or ayin"yod), as lexicons say of twraq in Song > 1:3 -------- see 2K 11:15 > As a verb, from hophal. > 3. From verbs ayin"ayin (doubled), as David Kolinsky suggests -------- I > found no sample in the Tanakh. > Isaiah 33:1 $DD > > Then, the context and the sense must decide which is the precise root TWRQ > comes from. > Song 1:3 seems to be a rare construction: shemen twraq shimkha... > But, Karl, this is certainly not a noun. If the pattern [TW + 2 root > consonants] exists in Hebrew as a noun pattern... I surely would have found > it. > Let’s look in TWGH from YGH, TWDH from YDH, TWRH from YRH, TW$B from Y$B found in Genesis 23:4, Exodus 12:45, Leviticus 22:10 and at least nine other verses, so you should have found it. > > Friendly, > > Pere Porta > (Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain)= > So my question remains, is this a noun from YRQ? Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
