Biblical Hebrew Forum

[decaen AT chass.utoronto.ca (Vincent DeCaen)]

reading genesis with intro students: ch.3, v.15.

lemma T.:$W.PEN.W.

i explained the ennu vs ehu as the preservation of the older nunation
associated with the indicative vs subjunctive, with enhu > ennu.

in other words, i'm claiming *n marked indicative generally, its absence
subjunctive.

but then i was asked about the lemma Y:$W.P:KF, and why it wasn't
Y:$W.PEK.F with the indicative nun, enka > ekka.

on the fly, i thought of an interesting and probably correct analogy:
there is a pausal vs contextual variation for "from you(ms)", viz.
MIM.EK.F  vs  MIM.:KF

what if we're missing the regularity of the hebrew phenomenon because of
tiberian pausal phonology?

what do you think....?

sholom,
V
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr Vincent DeCaen     <decaen AT chass.utoronto.ca>
c/o Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, 4 Bancroft Ave., 2d floor
University of Toronto, Toronto ON, CANADA, M5S 1A1

Hebrew Syntax Encoding Initiative, www.chass.utoronto.ca/~decaen/hsei/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Love work. Hate authority.  --Shemaiah, from Avot