b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
- To: Herman Meester <crazymulgogi AT gmail.com>
- Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8)
- Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 12:10:03 +0000
On 02/12/2005 07:50, Herman Meester wrote:
...
You have a good point there. I think I will let go of the idea that
C1-gemination is dependent of Hebrew losing its final short vowels. In
my theory, if we assume that Hebrew and Arabic cannot both have
independently invented the C1-gemination as article (which is not
certain of course, we cannot exclude the possibility of one language
influencing the other, but that chance is naturally smaller), we have
to believe that when (proto-)Hebrew and (proto-)Arabic still had full
short vowel endings in use, C1-gemination was already innovated in the
language. Or wasn't it an innovation at all, rather a very old
phenomenon in one branch of Semitic? I will further explore the link
between Arabic and Hebrew regarding Wayyqtl and the article. We also
have the "Lam Yaqtul" phenomenon in Arabic, which is also an
interesting example of "preterite yiqtol"; imagine (I'm not saying I
think it's possible yet) that even Yaqtul in Lam yaqtul is the result
of dissimilation of La-yyaqtul ~> lam yaqtul! After all,
(proto-)Semitic, I thought, has basically "LA" for the negation; it is
interesting to see if Arabic Lam and Lan could have anything to do
with dissimilation of C1(prefix)-geminates in the yaqtul verb form. In
all cases where Lam or Lan are used (my Arabic grammar says) a yaqtul
(usually called imperfect) verb form has to follow directly! This is
very interesting, of course. Now we can suggest that either an "[n]"
or an "[m]" is there inside Wayyqtl, too. But then we have to design
very complicated patterns of assimilation for Hebrew and Arabic,
because we can't see this [m] or [n] in any Wayyqtl in Hebrew, if I'm
informed well. But before I continue this speculation, I'll take a
look in a bigger Arabic grammar.
Interesting, but this goes beyond my Arabic - except that I do know that LA still indicates negation in Arabic, I was saying it all the time to Egyptian street vendors! Remember that in Hebrew (but not in Arabic) nun assimilates regularly causing gemination, i.e. nC -> CC, in "weak" verbs and in the niphal yiqtol, so the observed pattern of wayyiqtol verbs and of definite nouns could be explained by a definite marker which was originally an- or han-. This marker, if in proto-NWSemitic, might have become al- in Arabic (at least in some environments) by some kind of dissimilation, but when combined with la- might have become lam-.
--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Herman Meester, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Peter Kirk, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Herman Meester, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Peter Kirk, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Herman Meester, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Peter Kirk, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Herman Meester, 12/02/2005
- Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8), Peter Kirk, 12/02/2005
- Message not available
- [b-hebrew] Fwd: Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8), Herman Meester, 12/02/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Herman Meester, 12/02/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Peter Kirk, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Herman Meester, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Peter Kirk, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Herman Meester, 12/01/2005
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8),
Peter Kirk, 12/01/2005
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew grammar, (was Zech 6:8), David Kummerow, 12/01/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.