Petr:

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Petr Tomasek <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 03:26:19PM -0700, K Randolph wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Are there any other verbs in Biblical Hebrew that have this
> > conjugation? Can you list a few examples?
>
> No. There are not. But causative stems with š-/s- are usual in many
> semitic languages, e.g. Aramaic, Akkadian, Ugaritic, Arabic, Geez.
>

Just because it was in other cognate languages does not mean that it was
ever in Hebrew.

>
> > If not, Biblical Hebrew does have a few quadriliteral roots, and this
> > follows the pattern of being one, namely שחוה $XWH, used only in Hitpael.
> >
> > There appear to be a few uses of the root שחה $XH in the Hitpael. Its
> form
> > is very similar to שחוה $XWH.
>
> No, it isn't. Show me another example of a triliteral root in any
> semitic language being extended by a consonantal W between the 2nd and
> 3rd radical...
> This is simply nonsense, it doesn't happen in the semitic languages.
>

That’s not what I wrote.

The verb שחה $XH which is used in binyanim other than Hithpael, is found in
Hithpael in Genesis 18:2, 19:1, 1 Samuel 24:8, 25:23, 41, and several other
verses.

The verb שחוה $XWH is found in Genesis 22:5, 42:6, Exodus 11:8, and many
other verses.

Are they the same verb? They are used in similar contexts, e.g. Genesis
24:26 & 48, or even within the same verses, e.g. Genesis 27:29, or do the
differences represent difference in meaning, e.g. one is physical, while
the other is attitudinal, mental or spiritual?

>
> >
> > > Observation. In 2Kg 5.18 הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָתִי the inf. has been vocalised
> in
> > > Biblical Aramaic fashion (wrongly, actually, for with the suffixes the
> inf.
> > > takes the ending ūt(). After a scribe had wrongly spelled וי, this
> sequence
> > > was later vocalised mechanically in the Aramaic fashion. One should
> read
> > > (in the 3rd pers.) הִשְׁתַּחֲווֹתוֹ."
> > >
> >
> > Does he have any documentation to back up this claim?
> >
> > This verse reads quite well as written using an unpointed text.
>
> How?
>

????? How not? There are six phrases in this verse, and each has a simple
meaning, where Naaman mentions one of his duties as top general to his
king, and he asks that God overlook that problem and forgive him for it.
Simple.

>
>
> Petr Tomasek
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

Reply via email to