Biblical Hebrew Forum

["B. M. Rocine" <brocine AT twcny.rr.com>]

Hi Pere,

You ask about an unusual word.  I do not think it is clear whether the 
one yod in K"LEYHF is a radical or a masculine plural construct ending, 
but I will venture an explanation favoring the latter.

Since the plural of K:LIY is K"LIYM rather than K"L:YIM, I would say the 
yod of K:LIY is dispensable, yielding to the regular morphological 
alterations of the plural and the plural construct.  Thus,

the singular with suffix is KEL:Y:KF, (retaining the radical yod)
the plural construct is K:L"Y (with the radical yod dropped and the 
regular yod of the masculine plural construct added)
the plural construct with suffix is K"LEYKF (radical yod dropped and yod 
of construct added)

I think the radical yod would prove dispensable if it is not a part of 
the original root from which the noun is derived, perhaps KLH or KL'.

Why are you interested in specifying the function of the yod in K"LEYHF?

HTH,
Bryan



pporta AT oham.net wrote:
> We have the word K"LEYHF in Ex 39:37.
> I'm wondering whether the yod is radical or not.
> Because the word comes from K:LIY  (Jer 18:4).
> Usually these yods placed before the suffixes are the mark of plural. But 
> here the yod is also part of the basic word.
>
> Would you say that this yod of the word in Ex 39:37 is radical?
> Or you would rather say it is the mark of plural?
> Or, maybe, a melting of both (root consonant + plural marker)?
>
> Pere Porta
> Barcelona (Spain) 
>   

--
B.M. Rocine
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13206
W:  (315) 437-6744