Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - re: tiberian weak spot, II

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Søren Holst <sh AT teol.ku.dk>
  • To: "'decaen AT chass.utoronto.ca'" <decaen AT chass.utoronto.ca>, Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: re: tiberian weak spot, II
  • Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:12:38 +0100


You hardly mean D-stem/pi'el is more widespread than G-stem/qal/pa'al *in
general*, do you?? (the statistical appendix to Jenni/Westermann
_Theologisches Handworterbuch_ says 68,8% G-stem and 9% D-stem out of all
verbal forms in HB - it's probably in the English translation _Theological
Lexicon of the OT_ as well).

But presuming you have specific roots in mind, like DBR which certainly does
have the distribution pattern of G-stem participles and D-stem transitives
that you mention, what other stems than DBR were you thinking of?

Your explanation of the phenomenon is interesting. My completely
off-the-top-of-the head and un-thought-through alternative might be that 1)
it was felt that the qal participle pattern has the feel of "the person
carrying out a certain act" (as opposed to other possible usages of a
participle) and therefore fits most of the usages of DoBeR, and 2) the pi'el
participle would be consonantally identical to a widespread noun MDBR =
wilderness, which might look sloppy when the participle has a nominal
function.

yours cheerfully
Soren Holst
Copenhagen



  • tiberian weak spot, II, Vincent DeCaen, 12/09/1999
    • <Possible follow-up(s)>
    • re: tiberian weak spot, II, Søren Holst, 12/10/1999

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page