Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 10/09/2004 21:08, wattswestmaas wrote:

> Hallo Members of the board,
>
> Please could someone clear up a minor confusion for me, OR a mistake on my
> part!
>
> Weingreen (Oxford Hebrew Grammar) writes: "It will be understood that ONLY
> the active verbs can take suffixes, niphal, pual, hophal and hitpael are
> passives/reflexives and cannot govern an object..." he then proceeds to make
> ONLY ONE exception (an infinitive construct, 'his being burned).
>
> I read then prov 2:22 and discover a NIPHAL with a suffix.  i then proceed
> to check in Shoshan's concordance and lo and behold --  loads more niphals
> with suffixes.  gesenius also mentions prov 2:22 as being a passive
> consttuction sentence.
>
>  
Weingreen is almost but not completely correct. From a search of the 
Westminster Hebrew Morphology, not the latest version, I found just 9 
cases in the Hebrew Bible of an object suffix on a nifal, hophal or 
hithpael finite verb (none for pual). I restricted the search to finite 
verbs ("perfect", "imperfect", vav consecutive and imperative). Here are 
the results of my search of the raw database:

...>grep "\@v[nPHt][piwv].*X[0-9]" *.wts
*** FILE 02ex.wts:
ex20:5,4.1 TF(FB:D/"^M^ (BD@vHi2msX3mp
ex23:24,4.1 TF^(FB:D/"^M (BD@vHi2msX3mp

*** FILE 05dt.wts:
dt5:9,4.1 TF(FB:D/"^M^ (BD@vHi2msX3mp
dt13:3,13.2 NF^(FB:D/"^M (BD@vHi1cpX3mp{1}Cm

*** FILE 102s.wts:
2s21:5,8.1 NI$:MA^D:NW. $MD@vnp3msX1cp

*** FILE 19ps.wts:
ps42:5,9.1 )ED.AD./"^M D.DH@vti1csX3mp
ps109:3,4.2 Y.I^L.FX:AM^W./NIY LXM_1@vnw3mpX1cs

*** FILE 23is.wts:
is14:2,5.2 HI^T:NAX:AL^W./M NXL@vtp3cpX3mp{2}
is44:21,11.1 TIN.F$/"^NIY N$H@vni2msX1cs

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