Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Yitzhak:

Judges 5:7 is not a clear example to point to for the Shafel form. I have 
always read it as (D )$R [verb] phrase which means until the action specified 
by the verb happens. But in the poetic form, the )$R is shortened to a 
prefixed $-. The (D )$R is spelled out in over 40 verses in Tanakh.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>

> 
> Thank you for all the above.  This was very useful.  Interestingly,
> Rabin does not credit Soggin and Wachter does not credit Rabin or
> Soggin. Rabin does seem to mention that it was a suggestion by
> Albright in 1945, and perhaps it was Albright's influence that led to
> all of these.  Soggin's piece in _Old_Testament_and_Oriental_
> _Studies_ is a translation of his original Italian.  It was very useful to
>   me.  On page 190, and later, on page 201 n. 34, he presents the case
> that shaqqamti in Judges 5:7 is of Shafel form.  I had
> presented this on ANE a few months back, but since then could not
> find substantiation for it anywhere.  Rabin seems to claim that the
> words are borrowed from "Amorite" and Soggin seems to claim it is
> based on Akkadian influence on Hebrew, Amorite, etc.  He also
> points out that unlike the suggestion I made above, Ugaritic has a
> Shafel but third person "h" pronouns.  Also, points were made
> regarding, for example, Amarna having a mainly h- form causative,
> but also smaller amounts of $-form causatives.
> 
> The sentence in his book is ambiguous on that point just like the
> English translation: "The Shafel form disappears and Haphel (which
> became Hiphil) becomes the only causative."  If you remove the
> parenthesis, you do get that meaning, but it's ambiguous as it
> stands.
> 
> Yitzhak Sapir
-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm