Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>]

>> Since you proposed this to Pere
>> it would only be curtious to provide him with your proposed form.
>
[KR]
> The “proposed form” is the word as written. Without the Masoretic points.
>
>>
[RB]
>> So without a proposed and supported form
>> there is nothing to discuss. Just how do you propose to take a
>> root alef.yod.dalet and produce a pi``el participle spelled
>> mem.alef.dalet?
>
> Was that a tri-literal or a bi-literal root? The concept that all Biblical
> Hebrew verbs have tri-literal roots is “first year Hebrew” which I question,
> and for good reason. If bi-literal root, just as written.

First, you referred to a noun with alef.yod.dalet., a tri-litteral root.

Secondly, a 'bi-litteral pi``el' is non-communicative as it stands.

What in the world is it supposed to sound like and why would it
be called a pi``el?
A pi``el? what kind of morphology is a pi``el?
You don't have a structural length phoneme
in the middle in your system, so what is it?

We do have 'two-letter' "pi``el-types"s, but they get their
middle length through reduplication:
kilkel, siksek, tsiftsef, kirker, ti`ta`, etc.
None of which supports m.alef.dalet as a "pi``el".

This raises a question,
why do you have a category "pi``el"?
It's from the Masoretes !
You are free to invent your own language without a pi``el
category.
You don't have any phonemic consonantal length to deal with.
You can attribute verbs with 'm' prefixes to hif`il, and those without 'm',
to either Qal QATAL or Hif`il YIQTOL.
And you aren't constrained with having to explain
correspondences within and with Arabic, Syriac, Mishnaic Hebrew,
and Masoretic Hebrew, and Akkadian and Ugaritic. (They do all
have lengthened middle-letter binyanim. And none of them would
support m.'.d. as a "pi``el". But since none of these are consonantal
BH, you could ignor them and declare them irrelevant. [this doesn't
make it true, but you could do it.])

Or, otherwise, you will need to explain how a two-consonant root can be
a pi``el, whatever that ends up being in your system.
Without an explanation and definition of the pi``el morphology, the proposal
of an 'undefined pi``el' becomes gibberish//charabiya.

So please be a little clearer with your definitions of pi``el.

-- 
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth AT gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life