Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

Pere,

The acts RUC, KUM, SUR, $UB appear to be inherently voluntary [as  
opposed to NI-RDAM, 'fell asleep' and the corresponding NE-(OR, 'woke  
up, bestirred', as in Zechariah 2:17] and hence a Niph'al form is not  
listed for them. The roots SUG, 'deviate, recede', MUG, 'melt away,  
dissolve', PUC, 'disperse', RUM, 'lift', are listed in the Hebrew  
grammar books as "having" a Niph'al form, so I do not see why RUC  
should not have it.
If the Niph'al form of MUG is NA-MOG, of PUC is NA-POC, 'became  
dispersed', and of RUM is NA-ROM, why not RUC -> NA-ROC. The NA-MOG-U  
KOL YO$BEI KNA(AN of exodus 15:15 could equally well have been NA-SOG- 
U KOL YO$BEI KNA(AN or NA-POC-U KOL YO$BEI KNA(AN or NA-ROC-U KOL YO 
$BEI KNA(AN, 'dispersed are all the inhabitants of Kna(an'.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Apr 5, 2008, at 12:18 AM, <pporta AT oham.net> wrote:

> > > As regards "to run"... are you sure that it is one of them?
> > > If yes, do you think that:
> > >
> > > 1. I run 20 miles every week  -- is intransitive use
> > > 2. I cannot run this program -- is transitive use?
> >
> > Correct on both. Or another example, "The snake oil salesman was  
> > run out
> > of
> > town."
>
> _______
>
> Yes, Karl.
> > From an English viewpoint this is as you write. But from a Hebrew  
> > viewpoint
> it is wrong.
> The Hebrew view of the sentence is:
> "The snake oil salesman was caused to run out of the town"
> Namely, the Huph'al and not the Niph'al of "run".
> I mean: the right word  --if we should to translate the sentence into
> Hebrew-- would not the Niph'al of RWC, but the Huph'al of RWC. Look  
> at B.2
> in  www.oham.net/out/P-d/P-d083.html
> and remark the examples taken from the Bible.
> I suggest you to take advice whether the Niph'al of RWC really exists.
>
> Warm greetings!
>
> Pere Porta
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew