Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Jason,

I am afraid you are wrong. The MI$KAL of XUMCAH is unusual. Consider:
גַּבָּה
דִּבָּה
חֻפָּה
אִכָּר
גֻּמָּץ
טַבָּח
חַוָּה
כֻּסֶּמֶת
אַיָּלָה
דַּבֶּשֶת
אַבִּיר
צִפִּיָּה
פִּסָּה
בִּכּוּר
טַבּוּר
חַבּוּרָה
בִּכּוּרָה
כַּמּוֹן
גִּבּוֹר
כִּנּוֹר
כַּפֹּרֶת
תִּמּוֹרָה
שִבֹּלֶת
כֻּתֹּנֶת
גִּבֵּן
אִגֶּרֶת

Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Feb 25, 2009, at 6:24 PM, Jason Hare wrote:

> Isaac,
>
> These things make perfect sense when you go by the regular rules of
> pointing. Did I understand you correctly when you said that you think
> that dagesh is supposed to follow /i/ or /u/? That's not at all what
> it's function is. In terms of pointing, both חֻמְצָה XUMCFH and
> חֻמְּצָה XUM.CFH make perfect sense in their respective  
> forms. Pi'el
> and Pu'al both have doubled middle radicals, which explains the dagesh
> in the latter form. It has nothing to do with the presence of kubuts
> (U) but with the binyan. I don't see why you resist this idea so
> strongly. It's almost like you want to stay separate in your ideas. It
> might do you some good to invest time in reading a normative grammar
> of Biblical Hebrew. Growing up speaking Israeli Hebrew does little by
> way of explaining the minute pieces of grammar and the morphological
> details that are so easily overlooked in the regular course of
> education. Biblical Hebrew and Modern Hebrew really do have a lot of
> separation when it comes to matters of syllabification rules and
> standard orthography, and it might do you some good in terms
> understanding WHY if you would sit down with a decent grammar.
>
> Regards,
> Jason Hare
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
> > John,
> >
> >  I am not sure if this is what you are looking for, but consider
> > XUMCAH, (חֻמְצָה), 'acid', punctuated qubuc, schwa, qamac, but
> > with no dagesh in the M, in spite of the KTIB XASER. Yet the pual
> > form XUMCAH, (חֻמְּצָה), 'she was made sour' is also
> > punctuated qubuc, schwa, qamac, but now with a dagesh in the M as per
> > the rule.
> > In any event, these are only formal games.
> >
> > Isaac Fried, Boston University
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew