Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>]

Dear Peter,

The reason it's not reduced is that it bears the accent on the first 
syllable. Accordance parses it as construct.

>   >Mark: But that's by no means certain. The LXX understood it as a construct.
> > But the form is the same as a non-construct plural. The only two other times
> > that this exact form ZaROTH is used in the Hebrew Bible (Job 5:19 and Psalm
> > 71:20, see also Psalm 46:2; Deut. 31:17 & 21) the form is definitely NOT
>   >construct.
>
> Wouldn't the construct form be C:ROWT with sheva, not qamats, according
> to regular rule for shortening of construct forms? If so, that would
> tend to confirm that this is an absolute form.


HH: This form does not reduce when it's construct elsewhere in the OT.

                                Yours,
                                Harold Holmyard

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew