BH: indicative nunation?
decaen at chass.utoronto.ca
Mon Apr 2 14:02:58 EDT 2001
reading genesis with intro students: ch.3, v.15.
i explained the ennu vs ehu as the preservation of the older nunation
associated with the indicative vs subjunctive, with enhu > ennu.
in other words, i'm claiming *n marked indicative generally, its absence
but then i was asked about the lemma Y:$W.P:KF, and why it wasn't
Y:$W.PEK.F with the indicative nun, enka > ekka.
on the fly, i thought of an interesting and probably correct analogy:
there is a pausal vs contextual variation for "from you(ms)", viz.
MIM.EK.F vs MIM.:KF
what if we're missing the regularity of the hebrew phenomenon because of
tiberian pausal phonology?
what do you think....?
Dr Vincent DeCaen <decaen at chass.utoronto.ca>
c/o Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, 4 Bancroft Ave., 2d floor
University of Toronto, Toronto ON, CANADA, M5S 1A1
Hebrew Syntax Encoding Initiative, www.chass.utoronto.ca/~decaen/hsei/
Love work. Hate authority. --Shemaiah, from Avot
More information about the b-hebrew