[b-hebrew] pairs with final h
Nir cohen - Prof. Mat.
nir at ccet.ufrn.br
Sun Jan 9 11:02:38 EST 2011
i have addressed this in another email on your question last week which maybe you did not get (i will look for a copy). meanwhile, summarizing all the answers so far, it appears that (in the case of nouns, not verbs) NO pair is an exact match. the pair with final H is as a rule a variant on the one without H. actually, "orah" is used in esther for "happiness" and not "or", so it is far from being a perfect match.
the closest pair is LAIL and LAILAH, (both in masculine!) with lailah (gen1:5) as the main word. here i cannot explain the relation between the two words.
it is interesting that the plural form in some of the cases (or/orah, lail/lailah)
is the same: orot, leilot.
also in my list at least
> *. qodesh, qdushah
> *. esh, isheh!!! vaikra 22:8, 23:25 (both feminine, plural: ishim)
> *. nexoshet, nexusha naikra 25:19 (both feminine! plural: nexushtaim?)
may be close or identical. also geva' and giv'ah. also ra' (as in "la'asot hara' ", and only in the singular) and ra'ah (plural: ra'ot). maybe the difficulty with the plural was the origin for some of these pairs.
it is difficult, usually, to confirm EXACT meaning for a pair of words,
especially when usually one of the two words is rare and might
have had a slightly different connotation in the past. for example, isheh may be restricted to sacrifice, in which case isaac fried might interpret the final H as referring to god.
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011 10:32:14 +0100, Pere Porta wrote
> While XOQ and XUQFH are clearly related both in form and in meaning, it seems there to be no relation between BQ( and BIQ(H as regards the meaning; of course there is a clear relation between them in the form.
> But... in my original post I was dealing with that word kinds that though different in their form they seem to have exactly the SAME meaning...
> And so, Karl provided, between others, MELYC, spokesman, interpreter, and M'LYCFH, announcement. These are not exactly the same thing regarding their meaning..... though they are clearly related in their form.
> Remark: I wrote on )WR, light and )WRFH, light as well.
> And I looked for some pairs of EXACTLY this kind and not for something else.
> Pere Porta
More information about the b-hebrew