Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

Latter day grammarian, such as IF, argue that all Hebrew roots are  
the amalgamation of uni-literal roots.
The root $D שד 'extend', for instance, consists of the root $, which  
is the essence of $)H שאה and the root D,
which is the essence of D)H דאה  In the same way, יד = יאה +  
דאה, צד = צאה + דאה

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Jan 17, 2012, at 10:41 AM, TedBro AT aol.com wrote:

> A good example of why some medieval grammarians argued that Hebrew  
> roots were basically bi-literal instead of tri-literal.
>
> -Ted Brownstein
>
> In a message dated 1/17/2012 9:53:34 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> if AT math.bu.edu writes:
> The shorter form $D is a variant of
>
> DD, ZD, YD, SD CD, $D, TD
>
> דד, זד, יד, סד, צד, שד, תד
>
> From DD we have:
> DAD, 'breast, teat, bulge, nipple', DADAH, 'move unsteadily and
> waveringly, shake and tilt
> from side to side' (compare: תעתע, צעצע, טאטא, זעזע,
> שעשע), DUDA, 'sprout' (compare the
> modern תות TUT), DUD, 'pot, teat-like basket', DOD, 'side relation,
> consort, partner, YDIYD'.
>
> From ZD we have:
> ZED (also $ED), 'deviant, devious', ZAD-ON, 'intention,
> premeditation, purpose'.
>
> From YD we have:
> YAD, 'hand, a thrusting outward bodily limb, jutting out appendage,
> extremity'.
>
> From SD we have:
> SAD, 'log', SOD, SID, bundle, collection, accumulation'.
>
> From CD we have:
> CAD, 'side, extension, accumulation '.
>
> From $D we have:
> $AD,'teat', $OD, 'collection, accumulation'
>
> From TD we have:
> YATED, 'peg, nail'.
>
> Isaac Fried, Boston University