Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Pere:

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Pere Porta <pporta7 AT gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>> (PP) Patterns consisting of prefix M- and two root letters are always
>>>
>>
>>> 1. Either Hiph'il Participles as in Ez 33:32; Jr 21:4; Pr 17:4...
>>>
>>
>> (KR) What makes you think they are all hiphils? Tradition? Masoretic
>> points?
>>
>>
> (PP)
>
> I say that (disregarding of vowel points), a Hebrew word that consists of
> [M + two root consonants] (as it would be the case for M'D in your
> viewpoint) cannot be a Pi'el Participle.
>

Why? On what basis is this claim made?

>
>
> (PP)
>
>>
>>> (How would you justify this possibility of a Pi'el Participle?)
>>>
>>
>> (KR) First, the adjective/adverb “exceeding, very” does not fit this
>> context.
>>
>> If you disagree that this is a piel, according to your description above,
>> it could be a hiphil. But I find myself questioning if all those called
>> hiphils really are hiphils, not only here, but on other verbs as well.
>>
>>>
>
>>   (PP)
>>>
>>
> It would be good and interesting, Karl, that you give some (at least one)
> examples of what you're saying here.
>

What I am saying here is that even if you insist that it be a hiphil, it
still does not follow the Masoretic points.


> Maybe it would make the starting point of an interesting and profitable
> discussion among us.
>

That was one of the threads in my discussion with Randall Buth on the verb
NGD. In looking at all the occurrences, some look like hophals, some piels,
some puals, while he claimed all were hiphils.

>
> It is possible that in certain cases a given word (in the Bible) that has
> been currently taken as a hiphil .... is not a hiphil but something else.
>
>  In a more general way: I say that this structure: M + TWO root consonants
> is NEVER a Piel Participle in the practice of the Hebrew language.
>

How do you know? What data are you using?

>
> (I'm not denying that in some cases you may be right in the sense that the
> traditional masoretic points are (or can be) wrong.
> By the way, Karl, are you creating a list of these words?).
>

No, I’n not making a list. First and foremost, when I sit down to read from
Tanakh, I read an unpointed text, so usually I don’t know when I read it
using different points.

There are a few exceptions, one being Isaiah 30:14 where the text reminds me
of blacksmithing (which I have done) and not of pottery (which I have
studied). But most of the time I don’t know.

>
>>> Kind regards.
>>>
>>
>
>>
>>> Pere Porta
>>> (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
>>>
>>>
>>> Karl W. Randolph.