Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] A question on the segollate words

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: VC <vadim_lv AT center-tv.net>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] A question on the segollate words
  • Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:36:43 +0100

On 27/09/2004 12:08, VC wrote:

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.



See Gesenius et al section 84a part I, which gives a clear explanation
of the origin of segholates from originally monosyllabic forms, based on
evidence from Arabic etc. Gesenius' explanation is quite different from
your speculative one.


Well, Gesenius simply presumes the kitl form. Its presence in modern Arabic
does not prove in any way its antiquity. Such form is extremely atypical for
Hebrew, and unless someone demonstrates where the kitl came from, this is
not an explanation, but rephrasing of a problem.


Gesenius also links it with Akkadian (which he calls Assyrian) and thereby demonstrates clearly that the proto-Semitic form is like qitl-u or qatl-u. Any attempt to get further back than proto-Semitic can be no more than speculation.

It seems very clear to me as a linguist that surface forms like MELEK are a recent phonological development from underlying MALK etc. Just as Russian inserts e or o in difficult final consonant clusters, when there is no suffix in the nominative singular or genitive plural, so also Hebrew inserts a vowel and makes a compensatory change to the preceding vowel, which is not found in inflected forms.

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






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page