Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>]

Again - I just want to focus of the "base morpheme". I didn't know what 
the term is for this part of the word. I know the of the prefix and 
suffix - but never learned the term of the part in the middle of the 
prefix and suffix. So I coined the term "base".
What is that part called?

In the following example:
<H:A/$OM"R> vs <HA/$.OM"R>

The dagesh has no effect on the "base morpheme." With or without the 
dagesh its still a "Qal Participle Masculine Singular".
THIS.... THIS is what I am concerned about - and have been trying to ask 
all this time.
Is there any examples where adding/removing a dagesh from the "base" 
with NO OTHER graphic changes to the "base" effect a change of the 
meaning of JUST the "base"?

So can someone PLEASE answer my actual question. Don't tell me about the 
relationships between vowels and dageshim, or letters being absorbed by 
other letter. As interesting as that might be - it does not answer my 
question.

I just want a simple "Yes" or "No", and is the answer is "yes" at least 
one example of each word from the Bible.

David Kummerow wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Sorry, by questioning "base morpheme", I was simply wondering what
> meaning you were giving this term as it seems to be a term coined by
> yourself, that's all.
>
> To assert that "the dagesh has no effect on the meaning of the base" is
> a rather confusing way to put things.
>
> a) While the prefix does not alter the semantics of the following
> participle, the dagesh does in fact alter the semantics of the morpheme
> of which it forms an essential part -- /haC-/ is the morpheme in
> question, and to remove this alters the morpheme and consequently the
> semantics. Hence your claim that removing the dagesh involves no meaning 
> loss is not true.
>
> b) While the prefix does not alter the semantics of the following
> participle, it does have scope over the following particle. If the
> morpheme is /haC-/ or /ha-/ alters the illocution considerably. Hence
> again your claim that removing the dagesh involves no meaning loss is 
> not true.
>
> Regards,
> David Kummerow.
>
>
>   
> > David Kummerow wrote:
> >  > Hi John,
> >  >
> >  > Not sure what you mean by "base morpheme".
> >  >
> > By "base morpheme" I mean the main part of the word - not the prefix(es)
> > or suffix(es).
> > This should have been clear by my use of the example  below of:
> >
> > <H:A/$OM"R> vs <HA/$.OM"R>:
> > <$OM"R> = Qal Participle Masculine Singular
> > <$.OM"R> = Qal Participle Masculine Singular
> >
> > So lets just focus on the dagesh on the base.
> > So in the above example the dagesh has no effect on the meaning of the 
> > base.
> > Its Qal Participle Masculine Singular with or without the dagesh.
> >
> > Are there any examples where the dagesh (and it alone) will change the
> > meaning?
> >
> >
> >
> > B"H
> > John Steven
> >
> >     
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>