-mw suffix (was Re: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53:8)
vadim_lv at center-tv.net
Tue Dec 14 02:21:19 EST 2004
> >While not impossible, lmo and lamo being the same lemma is unlikely. First,
> >schwa expanding into full kamatz is too much. Normally, pausal forms see
> >expansion of either short or the reduced vowels, ...
> I don't think the facts support this. According to GKC 29m,n the
> following pausal changes occur from sheva to qamats:
> QF+:LFH > QF+F^LFH
> $IM:(W. > $:MF^(W.
> ):ANIY > )F^NIY
> In fact what is happening in such cases is that the pausal form retains
> the full vowel which is lost when the stress shifts off it in the
> non-pausal form.
Exactly my point above. The reduced vowel may elongate back to kamatz in pausal.
> It can hardly be parsed as
> regular l- plus a root mo, because there is no root mo.
I think it could. cmo, bmo, lmo suggest c, b, l preposition + mo. mo, in my opinion, is not a root, but rather the very early form of the collective plural suffix waw, which later became -on (helbon) and -ot (zvaot).
But lamo - I would follow Steinberg in l+hem+o.
More information about the b-hebrew