[b-hebrew] Noun in -WT
pporta7 at gmail.com
Wed Apr 20 15:12:10 EDT 2011
My proposal, Karl, points only --at least in a first step-- to nouns
ending in -WT (read: -oot in the English system) and within the boundaries
of, so to say, basic nouns as those I brought in my mail.
We could deal, for instance, with the following issues:
1. Why some have shewa in the first syllable while others have qamats.
2. How they form their plural abolute.
3. Those with qamats, do they keep this qamats in the declension?
4. Which meaning they developed starting from the basic meaning of the stem.
5. Why some stems gave a noun in -WT while other stems of the same type did
And so on.
This could become a discussion that could be of interest for many -or at
least a relevant part- of the members of this list, methinks.
The threads we could debate are many.
And, of course, if someone has other proposals, please, do not hesitate to
bring them here.
Indeed, debating on the Hebrew language and enlarging our knowledge of
it, is the declared purpose of this beloved b-hebrew list.
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
2011/4/20 K Randolph <kwrandolph at gmail.com>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Pere Porta <pporta7 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I intended, Karl, to discuss within the boundaries of the most elementary
>> nouns ending -WT
>> Your list, indeed, is a very mixed one: nearly the half of the nouns are
>> but plurals (ending in -WT = -OT)
> I skipped those that are obvious plurals.
> But when one has words that have what appear to be singular meanings, but
> ending in -WT with no, none, examples in Tanakh of a singular form with a -H
> suffix, I then list them according to the forms found in Tanakh. I prefer
> that to listing them under unattested forms according to theory. What do
> you think?
>> Regarding MW$Y(WT....... where does it appear?
> Whoops! A typo. Thanks for catching it.
> MW$(WT found in Psalm 68:21 (20 in English).
>> Pere Porta
>> (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
>> Karl W. Randolph.
More information about the b-hebrew