[b-hebrew] Piel or "stative usage of verb"

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Thu Oct 8 08:42:34 EDT 2009


On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Randall Buth <randallbuth at gmail.com> wrote:

> vayyixtov Karl
> >First of all, is this piel? How do you know? Why should we consider it a
> >piel? (Remember, for this discussion, you cannot use the Masoretic
> points.)
> Maybe someone could consider p.l.s. to be a pi`el
> because a qal has neven been attested in the whole history of the language.
> How do you know a qal has never been attested in the whole history of the

I just did a quick electronic search of Tanakh and found that the verb is
used only six times in Tanakh, five of them in context of a road or path.
Only one of them is it clear from the form that it is a piel. So from the
contexts, how do you know that the other five occurrences of the verb are
piels (remember, in this discussion, you cannot refer to the Masoretic

(Notice, I do not claim they are not piels, just ask for why I should
consider them piels.)

Karl W. Randolph.

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list