Biblical Hebrew Forum

["George F. Somsel" <gfsomsel AT juno.com>]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 22:02:52 +0200 "wattswestmaas"
<wattswestmaas AT eircom.net> writes:
> I really did not want to bother you but I am really gettin 
> 'spaghettied' by
> all these millions of possibilities in weak verbs.
> 
> With plenty of references at hands they always seem to not tell you 
> want you
> desperately wish to know.  the root NUN-SAMECH-HEH falls under the 1 
> nun and
> lamed heh stem.  OK so far.  It is ONLY in the piel when translated 
> as
> 'TEST' 'EXAMINE'  However the NUN SAMECH HEH in psalm 4:7 (which 
> Yigal has
> kindly pointed out as maybe a root from NUN SAMECH SAMECH) does NOT 
> fall
> into the afore-mentioned category (even as a QAL)?  And if it is 
> from the
> NSS root then it falls Either under the strong verb OR the Peh-Nun 
> category.
> THUS, it seems to be in a category all by itself??????  I am on 
> about the
> "sheva" under the NUN.
> 
> OK I know you have spotted the errors in my thinking probably, when 
> you do
> not have anyone to talk to you can imagine my ongoing frustrations 
> with many
> of the weak verbs apparent consistency in having myriads of 
> combinations in
> their vowels!?!?  It is a daunting task.
> 
> Thanking you extra for anyone who may take the trouble to explain 
> whatever
> it is I am not understanding.
> 
> Chris.
> _______________________________________________
 
NS) is a variant of N%) [nun sin aleph], not N$H.  It is not unknown for
a final aleph to fall away so what we have is a qal imperative of NS[%])
with a paragogic heh.  Just as there are variants in English spelling
(particularly between Brits and Americans), so there were some variant
spellings in Hebrew.  Samekh and sin must have sounded much the same so
it is possibly a copying error in which the text was read aloud and
copied by several scribes.  One (or more) copyist(s) probably thought
they heard samekh rather than sin.

george
gfsomsel