Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Gerry Folbre <gfolbreiii AT gmail.com>]

I sent this earlier, but not to the b-hebrew lists.  I've got it this time.


Karl:

Karl wrote: “I just did a quick electronic search of Tanakh and found that
the verb is

used only six times in Tanakh, five of them in context of a road or path.
Only one of them is it clear from the form that it is a piel. So from the
contexts, how do you know that the other five occurrences of the verb are
piels (remember, in this discussion, you cannot refer to the Masoretic
points)?

(Notice, I do not claim they are not piels, just ask for why I should
consider them piels.)”

Pr. 4:26 פלס מעגל רגלך  וכל דרכיך יכנו׃

“Always make smooth the path of your feet; and all your journeys will be
directed securely.”

Pr. 5:21 כי נכח עיני יהוה דרכי אישׁ  וכל מעגלתיו מפלס׃

“When in front of the eyes of yhwh are the ways of man; thus all their
courses of action are surely made level.”

In these two examples the intensive Pi’el verb conjugation appears to make
sense; Pr. 4:26 “Always {intensively} make smooth” and Pr. 5:21 “are surely
made level/smooth”.

The context of the verses themselves appears to direct the verb פלס to be
accepted as the intensive Pi’el.

At least that is my understanding of the text.   Furthermore, I certainly
hope I have not made anymore typo's while transcribing the Hebrew Text.

Gerry Folbre
- Show quoted text -


On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:42 AM, K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com> wrote:

> Randall:
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > vayyixtov Karl
> > >First of all, is this piel? How do you know? Why should we consider it a
> > >piel? (Remember, for this discussion, you cannot use the Masoretic
> > points.)
> >
> > Maybe someone could consider p.l.s. to be a pi`el
> > because a qal has neven been attested in the whole history of the
> language.
> >
> > How do you know a qal has never been attested in the whole history of the
> language?
>
> I just did a quick electronic search of Tanakh and found that the verb is
> used only six times in Tanakh, five of them in context of a road or path.
> Only one of them is it clear from the form that it is a piel. So from the
> contexts, how do you know that the other five occurrences of the verb are
> piels (remember, in this discussion, you cannot refer to the Masoretic
> points)?
>
> (Notice, I do not claim they are not piels, just ask for why I should
> consider them piels.)
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>