Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 21/06/2004 05:11, Trevor Peterson wrote:

> > ===== Original Message From Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org> =====
> > Akkadian: shamu, mu
> > Ugaritic: shamuma, my
> > ...
> >
> >    
>
> The Akkadian and Ugaritic forms are also plural.
>
>  
On the Akkadian, this disagrees with BDB, which I quote:

s.v. MAYIM: As. mû, pl. mê, also mâmu

s.v. SHAMAYIM: As. šamû, pl. šamê, šamûtu, also šamâmu

Now I don't take BDB as the top authority on Akkadian (and it doesn't 
mention Ugaritic because it is too old - but it is what I have to hand), 
but it seems to suggest that mû and šamû are regular singular nouns 
which also have plural forms. Have I misunderstood BDB? Or is it wrong?

If I am right, the use of the plural form with singular meaning seems 
restricted to NW Semitic as I originally said, which puts a very 
different complexion on this issue than if it was found also in E Semitic.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/