Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>]

On 3/9/07, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
> On 3/5/07, Pere Porta wrote:
> > I read in an electronic search program (BW) that such a word as YUQAX (Gn
> > 18:4) is a passive Qal form. In the same program I read that YUQAM (Gn 4:24)
> > is a Hoph'al form.
> >
> > Vowel and dagesh structure is the same for both.
> >
> > Then do you think this division (Qal passive <> Hoph'al)  is right for the
> > brought two cases?
> > What is really Qal passive?  Beside the participle (Katub), are there for
> > this Qal passive conjugation all the normal forms or persons, tenses, etc.?
> > Is it used in the normal Perfect tense and, if yes, are there some samples
> > thereof in the Bible?

Dear Pere,

In light of Uri's points, I realize that I was quite careless in
analyzing the verb
yuqqam.  I see now your point, and you are quite right -- it probably should
be marked as a passive Qal as well, rather than a Pual.  My point about the
difference in dagesh was not in place.  The dagesh is for essentially the
same reason -- assimilation of lamed in lqx, and assimilation of nun in nqm.
This is also not a proper example of nesiga.  A more appropriate example
is Genesis 3:19 where [to:kal] has the stress on the first syllable.  In this
case, the stress does appear to move to the first syllable but this would be
a result of the Massoretic reading of these two words together as one
word -- as is shown by the maqqef.  To connect this to the other discussion
on verbal aspects, it has been suggested by Hetzron that the difference
between preterite and jussive was originally one of stress -- the preterite
having stress on the first syllable.  If so, perhaps this is a case of a
preterite and the maqqef is used here to preserve the original stress
distribution.

Qal passive is an entire verb form (binyan) that originally existed in some
Semitic languages including Arabic and Amarna.  Its structure in the prefix
conjugation in both Arabic and Amaran is one of yuqtal(u) and this is 
evidently
preserved in the Massoretic vocalizations (*yunqam > yuqqam, *yulqax >
yuqqax, *yuntan > yuttan).  However, it is easy to confuse with a Hophal (see
for example, Gen 22:20 vayyuggad).  In the suffix conjugation, it was probably
differentiated originally when the Biblical texts were written but by
the time of the
Massoretic vocalizations was vocalized the same as the Pual.

Yitzhak Sapir