Biblical Hebrew Forum

[David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>]

Hi Yitzhak,

It appears to me that you are desiring a phonological representation. 
Thus graphemic /vəyiqtol/ (or however it should be represented) = 
phonological [viyiqtol], etc. Either representation is perhaps OK so 
long as it is plain what the representation is.

Perhaps you should write an article arguing for a change in root and 
representation?

Regards,
David Kummerow.



> On 3/7/07, David Kummerow wrote:
>  >
>  > As a sometimes-user of such terms, I'll provide a comment.
>  >
>  > I can't speak for others, but I do not use the terms to imply that there
>  > is not some variability in spelling as you say. Since the usual paradigm
>  > root is qtl these days, a quick representation using English characters
>  > of the verbal paradigms using this root is as you've given them. If you
>  > have a better suggestion for formal labels, I'm happy to use them. But
>  > other terminology does start to get cumbersome, eg conjunction + short
>  > prefix verb, etc.
>
> A quick but more accurate representation with the root QTL is:
> VAYYIQTOL
> VIYIQTOL
> VAQOTAL
>
> I would suggest using the root SPR, as it is a complete verb, it is 
> actually
> attested in Biblical Hebrew, and it has a P for a BGDKPT (B and P being
> the simplest BGDKPT letters to represent in latin characters).  
> Furthermore,
> this one P is at the exact place where we would want it -- that is, to 
> indicate
> whether it was affected by a vowel in between the first and second root 
> letters.
>
> For the person, I would suggest using second-person to avoid the problem
> of the initial Y prefix.  For suffix forms, it also allows for an
> indication that there
> was no lost vowel between the verbal root and suffix.  This gives:
> VATTISPOR
> VATISPOR
> VASOFARTO
>
> The above accurately indicates the differences and similarities of the 
> verbal
> paradigm as realized by the Massoretes.
>
> Yitzhak Sapir