[b-hebrew] Qal passives

Donald Vance donaldrvance at mac.com
Sun Jun 20 17:23:45 EDT 2010


Let me try this again. (Stupid iPhone.) What do you call the qetil  
pattern if not a Gp?

Sent from my iPhone

Donald R. Vance
donaldrvance at mac.com

On Jun 20, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Donald Vance <donaldrvance at mac.com> wrote:

> Aramaic DID gave internal G passives. What ate you talking about?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> Donald R. Vance
> donaldrvance at mac.com
>
> On Jun 20, 2010, at 1:24 AM, Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Randall Buth wrote:
>>
>>> The MT has retained vocalizations like luqqaH and yuqqaH
>>> לֻקַּח יֻקַּח
>>> as well as yuttan יֻתַּן and 'ennenu ukkal' איננו
>>> אֻכָּל. [Note that this
>>> last form is a participle, and thus not pu`al, nor feminine like
>>> 'fire'.]
>>> This is remarkable because Aramaic had no internal qal passive, nor
>>> even a nifal. [Aramaic did have forms built off of the passive-
>>> perfect
>>> participle with cEc-I-c vowels.] And the BH vowels don't fit the
>>> Arabic
>>> passives, *luqiHa. They do not function as pu``als, and there are no
>>> pi``els attested for them to be passives to. From comparison with
>>> other Semitic languages it is clear that an internal Qal passive  
>>> used
>>> to exist, but a qal would not have a lengthened middle consonant:
>>> either *luqaH or *luqiH. but not *luqqaH.
>>> So how can the dagesh in MT luqqaH be explained?
>>> Due to the nature of long and short vowels in unaccented syllables,
>>> the
>>> passive nature of these BH forms needed to develop a morphological/
>>> phonetic change during the biblical/post-biblical period. The
>>> phonetic
>>> lengthening of the consonant after the [u] vowel achieved this. But
>>> this resulted in a homonym with pu``al forms in the past/suffix  
>>> tense
>>> and with hof`al in the future/prefix tense.
>>
>> I would like to suggest that perhaps it is not an issue of phonetic
>> change,
>> but of morphological leveling.  As internal Qal passives were
>> increasingly
>> lost, especially under the influence of Aramaic that did not have
>> them,
>> these were viewed not as a separate class by themselves but as an
>> exceptional form of the Pual and Hophal for some roots (just like
>> yitpaqad
>> might be viewed as an exceptional form of the Hitpael).  Eventually,
>> morphological leveling had its way, and the unique forms of the Qal
>> passives were lost.
>>
>> Yitzhak Sapir
>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing list
>> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list