Dave: Thanks for the explanation. It still doesn’t make sense.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Dave Washburn <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> > wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:26 PM, K Randolph > <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> > > wrote: > >> Ken: >> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Ken Penner >> <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> >> > wrote: >> >>> Do the following help? >>> >>> Joüon §59g: "In the light of Ugr. tštḥwy “she prostrates herself,” what >>> used to be considered hitpa̧ʿlẹl, represented almost entirely by the >>> frequent הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה to worship, to prostrate oneself, is most likely a >>> Hištafʿel of √ חוי." >>> >> >> From where does he get this? >> >>> >>> > What you're seeing, both there and in the Jouon quote, is a grammarian > trying desperately to figure out what's going on with this unique word. It > used to be taught that it was a hitpa`el of $XH with metathesis of the shin > and the tau, and no clue why the waw. But as Ken already mentioned, > Ugaritic has shown us that the root is actually XWH and the stem is a > hi$tap`el. Once upon a time we had a grid of stems with a hole in the > middle: > > Basic Emphatic Causative > > Active qal pi`el hip`il > > Passive nip`al pu`al hop`al > > Reflexive nip`al ? hitpa`el > > Thanks to Ugaritic, we now know what goes where the question mark is. And > yes, it only survives in this one word in that language, too. That's an > accident of preservation,… So the evidence is that because the Ugaritic grammar has this pattern, therefore it must be found in Biblical Hebrew as well? Why should I buy that argument? There’s a lot in that presentation that’s questionable, at least. That pattern does not fit what I’ve observed in Hebrew. It may fit Ugaritic, but not Hebrew. > … but I don't really think anybody can deny that the word exists. > > No question about the existence of the word, it’s one of the more common words used in Tanakh. The question here is the grammar involved, and the root. I think part of the problem is the insistance that Hebrew have a triliteral root system. But that’s not the case. There are several biliteral roots (into which lexicographers insert “materes lectionis” so they can list them as triliteral) and a few quadriliterals, and this verb acts like a well-behaved quadriliteral with a heh final. > > -- > Dave Washburn > > Check out my Internet show: http://www.irvingszoo.com > > Now available: a novel about King Josiah! > > Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
