Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Ken Penner" <pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca>]

Hi James,

I have produced a reference sheet of Hebrew roots which may be written
without all three radicals:
http://s91279732.onlinehome.us/reference/Weak%20Roots.pdf
These include:
1-Yod (etymological 1-Waw)
1-Nun
2-Yod / 2-Waw
3-He (etymological 3-Yod)
2=3 (Geminates)

(On page two I also present them sorted by the two remaining visible
radicals.)

Note that the 1-Yod will not be present in the Qal imperative and Qal
infinitive construct, although these have no prefix. 
Likewise for some 1-Nun verbs.
3-He is not present in Jussive and Wayyiqtol forms, even when no suffix is
present; and the Qal passive participle has 3-Yod.

Hope this helps,

Ken Penner
McMaster/Hebrew
Flash! Pro vocabulary software: http://s91279732.onlinehome.us/flash or
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flash_pro/join

> Am I
> right that if there is a verb with only two consonants of the 
> root left in
> the form, there only four basic possibilities in 
> reconstructing the root:
> 
> 1.    It is a bi-consonental root and can be looked up as is.
> 2.    The final He has dropped.  This could only be true if 
> the root has a
> suffix.
> 3.    An initial Yod or Nun has dropped.  This could only be 
> true if the root
> has a prefix.
> 4.    The second and third letters are identical and have merged.
> 
> If I am right this whole thing has just gotten a fair bit 
> easier.  Could
> someone confirm or deny this for me?