Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Maurice A. O'Sullivan" <mauros AT iol.ie>]

At 04:45 07/12/2005, Harold Holmyard wrote:
> HH: Ir's a Pual perfect form. There is a vowel above the Q.

The Westminster 4.0 morphology has no doubt that it is, and the 
Gesenius grammar on p741 concurs.

But HAL has reservations, adding: (passive qal ?)

Perhaps this is a nod in the direction of Waltke, B. K., & O'Connor, 
M. P. (1990). An introduction to biblical Hebrew syntax, which on 
p.418 states that " many passive Qal forms are pointed in the MT as 
Pual " and this is developed in s. 22.6:

>> The Masoretes recognized Qal only as an active stem, but there is 
much evidence that Biblical Hebrew also had a passive 
counterpart.  On comparative grounds a Qal passive is easily 
justified. A simple passive stem is attested in some of the cognate 
languages: in Arabic, where it is in full use;  in Ugaritic, where it 
cannot be readily distinguished in the prefix conjugation from the 
passive stem with prefix n; in the Tell Amarna glosses; and possibly 
in some Aramaic dialects.<<

Additionally, Lambdin in his basic grammar states ( p.253 ) " There 
are several forms, taken by the Masoretes as Pual or Hophal, which 
must rather be viewed as survivors of an obsolete passive of the Qual "

I see that the translation done by the author of the Word commentary 
on Isaiah is:
>> So that one calls them oaks of the legitimate, Yahweh's planting 
for beautification. <<





Maurice A. O'Sullivan
Bray, Ireland