b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: "Penner" <pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca>
- To: "'Biblical Hebrew'" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: RE: qatal vs. katab
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:46:50 -0500
> As a result, letters like
>
> gimel, dalet, zayin, tet, lamed, samekh, tsade, qoph, sin, shin.
>
> will remain. qatal is one possible combination. I don't
> remember which else seemed attractive.
And even of these few remaining consonants, the sibilants (samekh,
tsade, sin, shin) cause irregularities as the first consonant of a root
in the Ht binyan. So $PT is out.
In addition, we'd want the root to be attested in as many binyanim as
possible (PQD is the most regular root with 7), and preferably with its
most basic meaning in Qal (unlike DBR), and with active (not stative)
meaning (unlike KBD and QD$), and reasonably common.
In short, there is no perfectly suitable root, although the least
problematic seem to me DBR KBD PQD QD$ RDP.
Ken Penner, M.C.S. (Regent College), M.A. (McMaster)
Ph.D. Student, Religious Studies,
Biblical Field (Early Judaism major)
McMaster University
Hamilton, Canada
pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca
Vocabulary Memorisation Software: http://sensoft.nav.to
-
qatal vs. katab,
Christian Hoffmann, 12/14/2001
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: qatal vs. katab, Maurice A. O'Sullivan, 12/14/2001
- RE: qatal vs. katab, Penner, 12/14/2001
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.