Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Pere Porta wrote:
>     (JS) I know that the lemma in ec3:18,11 is <H"M> (which was listed
>     in my question).
>
> (PP) No, you did not list <H"M>. You listed <H"N> and <HEM>, but not <H"M>
(JS) Actually I did. Here's a quote from my original post:
*****************************
I will start out with two questions:

My first question is with the third one listed <HEM>:
<HEM> as a Base:
ec3:18,11    | $:/HEM                    | P  $E@Pr  /  B  H"M@pi3mp
****************************************************

If you are talking about the first grouping of 9 that I had listed, the 
first one is <H"N>, but that group isn't involved in my question about 
<HEM>. Anyway, doesn't matter, as we are on the same page now. :)

>  
>
>     (JS) My question is, when looking at the word, what are the "red
>     flags" telling you that the <HEM> ending on this word is not a 3mp
>     suffix based on the <HM> lemma, but rather an independent 3mp
>     pronoun based on the <H"M> lemma?
>
>     (PP) The "red flags" are:
>
> 1. Whenever H"M or HEM comes alone (namely without a prefix as in Ex 
> 5:7,10)
> 2. And/or when HEM comes with a conjunction or a preposition put 
> infront of it as a prefix (as in Ec 3:18,11 or in Gn 41:56,12) 
> ----------> then it is an independent 3mp pronoun.
> Now, I think that when <HEM> has a conjunction or a preposition 
> attached infront of them we should better say that here HEM is an 
> independent 3mp pronoun with a prefix rather than saying it is a 
> suffix that has been attached to the preposition. Do you understand 
> the difference?
(JS) <HEM> never comes alone. According to BibleWorks the <HEM> 
(actually its <FHEM> according to WLC) is a 3mp suffix.
Yes, I understand the difference, and the point yuo are making. So the 
question is, is this an error on WTS/BW part, or are they right?

>  
>
>     (JS) Yes, I am aware that with <HOWN> and <NF)> the issue is that
>     with one the word is Aramaic, and the other is Hebrew. But I still
>     mention it for both the sake of completeness, and also to ask when
>     you encounter those words, beside just knowing "this part of
>     Daniel is in Aramaic" what other "red flags" are there. When just
>     looking those words, is there any way to detect that they are
>     Aramaic or Hebrew, and not the other.
>
> (PP) Unfortunately I do not know Aramaic. So I'm afraid I cannot 
> really give an answer to this question. But when looking at a given 
> verse (in Daniel or Ezra) if I see some words like DY (which is NOT 
> Hebrew) or some words ending in aleph where you would expect a H (as 
> in MLK) for MLKH, queen): then it is surely Aramaic and not Hebrew.
>  
> Now, regarding your HOWN and your HIY.
> HOWN in Ezk 27:12.5 is an autonomous noun that means "wealth" and it 
> has nothing to do with the suffix in Dan 2:44,1 (which is Aramaic).
> The same for HIY: in Ezk 2:10,12 it is an autonomous noun that means 
> "wailing" and has nothing to do with the final HIY in Psa 116:12,5 
> (you chose here a very special -odd- word, John!), where it means 
> "his" (a quite rare form!)
>  
(JS) Yep, I like to chose the odd ones. lol
So how does one detect that in ek2:10,21 its a noun and that in 
ps116:12,5 its a suffix - as these are the only two places in the Hebrew 
where this occurs? I guess the only way you would know is that in the 
first there's a conjunctive prefix, and the other is on a noun.
And this is because a suffix is never connected to a lone conjunctive 
prefix.

> Do you feel I'm right?
>  
> Pere Porta
> Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
>
>
>
>     Pere Porta wrote:
> >     Dear John,
> >     Concerning your first question (Ec 3:18.11...).
> >     The real base form is not HEM but H"M (Ex 5:7.10) (with tsere):
> >     base form.
> >     But whenever this H"M becomes suffix, then the tsere turns to
> >     segol, HEM. Look here: www.oham.net/out/S-d/S-d0154.html
> >     <http://www.oham.net/out/S-d/S-d0154.html> and the four that
> >     follow it and/or www.oham.net/out/S-t/S-t0240.html
> >     <http://www.oham.net/out/S-t/S-t0240.html> and the following.
> >     What, then, in Ec 3:18 (whre it is a base)?
> >     When a base word with tsere is followed by maqaf (= hyphen), then
> >     the tsere turns to segol: look at paragraph B, item 2 in
> >      www.oham.net/out/N-d/N-d07.html
> >     <http://www.oham.net/out/N-d/N-d07.html>.
> >      
> >     Remark: In HOWN and NF) you're mixing Hebrew and Aramaic: are you
> >     aware thereof? To my sense this is not legitimate.
> >     If you agree, I'm ready to give an answer to your second question.
> >      
> >     Pere Porta
> >     Barcelona, Catalonia Spain
> >
> >     On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com
> >     <mailto:Brak AT neo.rr.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         There are a few "word parts" that ares ambiguous (at least at
> >         first
> >         look) as too if the part is a base or a suffix.
> >         To define my terms here is an example:
> >         Word: <WI/YR"$W./KF>
> >         This is made up of three "word parts":
> >         Prefix: <WI>
> >         Base: <YR"$W.>
> >         Suffix <KF>
> >
> >
> >         There are 9 word parts that can go be either a base or a
> >         suffix, and I
> >         am trying to figure the logic behind when it is one or the other:
> >         <H"N>
> >         B: gn3:22,4 (Pi) [/in 86 other places/] / da2:5,9 (Pc_D) [/in
> >         15 other
> >         places/]
> >         S: ek16:47,10 (S3fp) [/in 2 other places/]
> >
> >         <H"N.FH>
> >         B: 2s4:6,1 (pi3fp) [/in 47 other places/] / gn15:16,4 (Pd)
> >         [/in 45 other
> >         places/]
> >         S: is34:16,7 (S3fp) [/in 2 other places/]
> >
> >         <HEM>
> >         B: ec3:18,11 (pi3mp) [/only //occurrence/]
> >         S: gn2:25,2 (S3mp) [/in 1923 other places/] / ex30:12,7
> >         (S3mpx) [/in 119
> >         other places/]
> >
> >         <HEN>
> >         B: nu23:9,7 (Pi) [/in 11 other places/]
> >         S: gn19:33,3 (S3fp) [/in 113 other places/] / 2k19:26,1
> >         (S3fpx) [/in 3
> >         other places/]
> >
> >         <HF)>
> >         B: da3:25,3 (Pi) [/only occurrence/]
> >         S: ek41:15,11 (S3fs) [/only occurrence/]
> >
> >         <HIY>
> >         B: ek2:10,12 (ncmsa) [/only //occurrence/]
> >         S: ps116:12,5 (S3ms) [/in 64 other places/] / da4:20,12
> >         (S3msx) [/in 3
> >         other places/]
> >
> >         <HOWN>
> >         B: ek27:12,5 (ncmsa) [/in 19 other places/] / ek27:27,1
> >         (ncmsc) [/in 4
> >         other places/]
> >         S: da2:44,1 (S3mp) [/in 13 other places/]
> >
> >         <NF)>
> >         B: gn12:11,11 (Pi) [/in 331 other places/] / ex12:9,4 (amsa)
> >         [/only
> >         //occurrence/]
> >         S: er4:12,10 (S1cp) [/in 2 other places/] / er5:11,3 (S1cpx)
> >         [/only
> >         //occurrence/]
> >
> >         <NIY>
> >         B: ek27:32,3 (ncmsc) [/only //occurrence/]
> >         S: gn44:15,16 (S1cs) [/in 16 other places/] / gn20:11,11
> >         (S1csx) [/in
> >         213 other places/]
> >
> >
> >
> >         I will start out with two questions:
> >
> >         My first question is with the third one listed <HEM>:
> >         <HEM> as a Base:
> >         ec3:18,11    | $:/HEM                    | P  $E@Pr  /  B
> >          H"M@pi3mp
> >
> >         <HEM> as a Suffix:
> >         gn3:7,3      | $:N"Y/HEM                 | B  $:NAYIM@ucmdc
> >          /  S  HM@S3mp
> >         gn6:13,13    | MI/P.:N"Y/HEM             | P  MIN@Pp_S  /  B
> >         P.FNEH@ncmpc  /  S  HM@S3mp
> >         gn8:19,11    | L:/MI$:P.:XO^T"Y/HEM      | P  L:@Pp_S  /  B
> >         MI$:P.FXFH@ncfpc  /  S  HM@S3mp
> >
> >         ec3:18,11 is the only time the word part <HEM> is a base, as
> >         pi3mp -
> >         every other 2044 places its a suffix as S3mp.
> >         Can anyone explain why?
> >
> >
> >
> >         My second question is with the second one listed <H"N.FH>:
> >         <H"N.FH> as a Base:
> >         lv4:2,18    <M"/H"^N.FH>   |      P  MIN@Pp_S    /    B
> >          H"N.FH@pi3fp
> >         je5:6,15   <M"/H"^N.FH>   |      P  MIN@Pp_S    /    B
> >          H"N.FH@pi3fp
> >         ps34:21,5   <M"/H"^N.FH>   |      P  MIN@Pp_S    /    B
> >          H"N.FH@pi3fp
> >         2s4:6,1      | W:/H"N.FH                 | P  W:@Pc_S  /  B
> >          H"N.FH@pi3fp
> >
> >         <H"N.FH> as a Suffix:
> >         is34:16,7   <M"/H"N.FH>   |      P  MIN@Pp_S   /    S  HNH@S3fp
> >         ek16:51,9   <M"/H"N.FH>   |      P  MIN@Pp_S    /    S  HNH@S3fp
> >         1c21:10,16   <M"/H"N.FH>   |      P  MIN@Pp_S   /    S  HNH@S3fp
> >
> >         The reason I have 2s4:6,1 listed is because it is in the base
> >         position,
> >         but without an accent.
> >         So how does one determine which it is?
> >
> >
> >
> >         B"H
> >         John Steven
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         b-hebrew mailing list
> >         b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> >         http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     -- 
> >     Pere Porta
> >     "Ei nekrói ouk eguéirontai, fágomen kai píomen áurion gar
> >     apothnéskomen" (1Cor 15:32)
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pere Porta
> "Ei nekrói ouk eguéirontai, fágomen kai píomen áurion gar 
> apothnéskomen" (1Cor 15:32)