Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Dora Smith" <villandra AT austin.rr.com>]

If yim is a Hebrew innovation, why does Arabic have it too?    Or atleast it
has alot of "yim"'s in it.   or 'im's.   I haven't analysed it to learn if
that is the way to make a plural.

How did other Northwest Semitic languages construct the plural?

And, probably the fundamental question of all, where did speakers of Hebrew
mport ""yim" from if not a Semitic feature?

Yours,
Dora Smith
Austin, Texas
villandra AT austin.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
To: <pinnerup AT privat.dk>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 6:32 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Re: Genesis 1:6-7, 8:1, Waters Above and Below


> On 19/06/2004 16:07, Rasmus Underbjerg Pinnerup wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:36:44 -0700, Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
wrote:
> >
> >
> >>So it is possible that "sky" goes back to something like "there
> >>water", but if so the naming must go back at least to proto-Semitic
> >>times - perhaps even to Adam in the garden!
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I thought the standard etymology for »shamayim« was »mayim« (waters)
> >plus the causative prefix »sha-« known from related Semitic languages.
> >Has this etymology been rejected?
> >
> >
>
> No, only pushed back to proto-Semitic. This indeed seems more likely
> that sham + ma (the -yim is a Hebrew innovation). It is also possible
> that shamayim received its -yim suffix by analogy and false etymology
> with mayim.
>
> I'm not sure where you get "standard etymology" from. It is not
> mentioned by Strong, BDB or TWOT.
>
> >It seems to me, that if the etymology was »sham« + »mayim«, there
> >would be a problem in explaining why »shamayim« only has one m.
> >
> >
> >
> Indeed.
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew