Biblical Hebrew Forum

["VC" <vadim_lv AT center-tv.net>]

Dear Listmembers,

 

Recently, a student inquired me of the origin of segollate words (kelev). I 
have never particularly dwelled on the problem, and a quick search both in 
the library and Internet did not produce much suggestions.

 

I was able, however, to offer a hypothesis, which I describe below. It seems 
rather obvious and was probably advanced by someone else before. So, I would 
appreciate any references or informed criticism of it.

 

  1.. calAv (kamatz-kamatz)
  2.. cAlav (kamatz-kamatz, stress on the first syllable). Accent' shift to 
the first open light syllable seems common to vulgar dialects; cf. cEE.gar, 
ShEE.cago, DEE.troit, also in Russian pal'.tO - pOl'.to, and in Ashkenazic 
SabbAth - ShO'.bos
  3.. cAi.lav (kamatz-iud-kamatz). Introduction of iud to close the open 
stressed syllable is prominent in Ashkenazic.
  4.. cE.lav (tzere-kamatz). The ai sound transformed into the diphthong ae, 
approximated by tzere. Unlike the pure tzere, ae has more of kamatz sound.
  5.. cElv. Unstressed kamatz after heavily stressed tzere turned into the 
movable shva.
 

The form cElv led to three developments.

 

    1.. cElev (segol-segol) from cElv (tzere-shva). The phenomenon of 
tzere-shva dissolving into segol-segol can be observed in cotevt - cotevet, 
mahbert - mahberet.
    2.. cEl.bu. The tendency of tzere in open syllable to appropriate the 
next consonant to close the syllable is of the same nature as the tendency of 
introducing iud to close the open syllable with tzere, talmideinu. Shortening 
of tzere into patah or hirek, cAl.bu or sIf.ru, is due to the word elongation 
by unstressed suffix, like in itlabesh - itlabashti.
    3.. cel.bI (pronoun suffix is stressed) from cEl.bu. Since tzere in 
cel.bI is actually ae, it dissolved when losing stress into either patah or 
hirek, thus sif.rI and cal.bI.
 

In plural with ending ei (tzere-iud), vulgar stress cannot fall on the first 
syllable, since tzere is generally stressed. Therefore, syllables are not 
transformed, and dagesh does not appear.

 

The necessary stressing of tzere explains another curiosity, the unstressed 
pronoun suffixes in verbs (dva.rhA, but catAv.ti). The original form of the 
past tense verbs, catEv (kamatz-tzere), transformed into catEv.ti, and 
shortened by unstressed suffix into catAv.ti. Rearrangement of the syllables 
explains the dagesh in the verb suffixes, while not in the noun suffixes.

 

 

Thank you in advance for your comments,

 

Sincerely,

 

Vadim Cherny