b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- 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.