Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>]

The only thing that sticks out to me, Pere, is that the Exodus XOT"N is a 
construct and the 1 Sam XFTFN is an absolute.  Other than that I am sure one 
of the real Hebrew scholars we are lucky enough to have on here will set us 
straight.

Y'know, this forum has been magnificent for at least 10 years that I have 
been on board and I don't remember if I have expressed my thanks and 
appreciation to the owner(s) and moderators for one of the most beneficial 
lists online.

I know Jim has been like a kid in a candy store.

To you guys and gals in the background, תודה רבה

Jack

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Pere Porta" <pporta7 AT gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 12:06 AM
To: <jimstinehart AT aol.com>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Any reason?

> Hi, list.
>
> We have in Ex 18:1 noun XOT"N, father-in-law.
> We have in 1Sa 18:18 XFTFN, son-in-law or daughter's husband.
>
> It seems clear that both nouns are related: their consonants are the same
> and appear in the same order....
>
> I'm wondering whether there is a good reason for this:
>
> Pattern of XOT"N is that of Qal Participle while pattern of XFTFN is that 
> of
> many Hebrew nouns (such as DFBFR, word (Gn 18:14) or ZFKFR, male in Gn
> 1:27).
>
> Would the reverse equally have been possible?
>
> Namely, that XOT"N would mean daughter's husband and XFTFN would mean
> father-in-law...
>
> Is there any reason for things having gone the way they have gone and not
> the reverse way?
>
> Pere Porta
> (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
>
>
>
> >  _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew