Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Yigal Levin <Yigal.Levin AT biu.ac.il>]

I'm not familiar with Le$ek, but it might be a modern back-formation from 
Li$kah.

 

The Moabite Mesha Inscription uses QR (with no yod) for city, showing that 
Hebrew QRYH is the feminine form of the same word. I'm not sure that QYR 
(with yod), wall, is really related.

 

Yigal Levin

 

 

 

 

From: Pere Porta [mailto:pporta7 AT gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 8:22 AM
To: Yigal Levin; Biblical Hebrew list
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Others?

 

Is noun Li$kah, room, chamber (Neh 13:5) not related to the noun existing in 
today Hebrew (not in the Bible) LE$EK, box?

 

It would be an analogous contruction to:

 

Qiryah, city (Is 1:21) (*), which is built up on Qyr, wall (Ez 4:3)...

 

(*) an (arranged) amount of walls (ramparts, houses...) 

 

 

Pere Porta

(Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)

2011/5/25 Yigal Levin <Yigal.Levin AT biu.ac.il>

Is Li$kah a Hebrew word, or is it a loan-word from Akkadian or Persian, which 
would explain its irregularity.

Yigal Levin


-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org 
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Pere Porta
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 7:28 AM
To: Isaac Fried
Cc: B-Hebrew
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Others?

Might we then say that, concerning the pointing pattern, noun LI$KAH,
chamber (Neh13:5) (*) belongs to a different mishqal from that of noun
$IKBAH, layer (**)?

Or should we rather say that they belong exactly to the same pointing
pattern, only that for an unknown reason the B of $IKBAH lacks dagesh?


(*) Dagesh in the K
(**) NO dagesh in the B

Regards

Pere Porta

2011/5/25 Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>

>  I am not sure how the present day $IKBAH, [$IXVAH] שכבה 'layer, stratum',
> came to be. In the bible (Ex. 16:13) it is found only in SMIYKUT as: $IKB-AT
> HA-TAL שִׁכְבַת הַטַּל 'lying dew', implying that the single is possibly
> $KABAH.
>
> I don't think that the Imperative form $IKBAH of Gn 39:7 "became" the noun
> for the 'layer' of today.
>
> The imperative $IKBAH, as well as the corresponding noun, lacks a dagesh in
> the B, and I, therefore, suspect it to be a latter form preferred by the
> NAQDANIYM.
>
> All other nouns of the same MI$QAL have a dagesh, as expected, to wit:
> XEMDAH, XERPAH, KISBAH, LI$KAH, NIQPAH, NI$KAH, EMDAH, [PITDAH], PISGAH,
> PIRDAH, PI$TAH, RIKBAH, RICPAH.
>
>
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
>
>  On May 24, 2011, at 1:51 AM, Pere Porta wrote:
>
>  We have in Gn 39:7 an Imperative form, $IKBAH, lie down (you, male)! (an
> alternative to $:KAB found in 2Sa 13:5)
> In today Hebrew we find the common noun $IKBAH, layer, social stratum.
>
> Apparently, an old Imperative form has become a feminine common noun today.
>
> I'm looking for other analogous cases: do you know of some others?
>
> Regards
>
> --
> Pere Porta
>
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
>
>
>


--
Pere Porta

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew




-- 
Pere Porta