Dear Peter,Harold, thank you for looking at these verses in more detail than I had time to do - I took longer than I had intended just extracting the list of references.
Yesterday I wrote:
Ps 42:5 looks like an odd form.
I apologize. i was looking at the English verse numbering and so not at the right Hebrew verse. The problem with Weingreen's assertion, I think, is that the Hithpael is not always either strictly passive or reflexive. Ps 42:5 is a place where it seems to have a more active meaning. Note this comment in GKC #54f(c) with regard to the Hithpael and reciprocal action: "It more often indicates an action less directly affecting the subject, and describes it as performed with regard to or for oneself, in own's own special interest. Hithpael (see Niphal #51e) in such cases readily takes an accusative."
A number of verse references are given at this point, one of them being Isa 14:2, which you have in your list of suffixed verbs. The same would probably be the case for Ps 42:5, if a repointing to Piel is not correct, as DCH suggests might be the need, among other suggestions. But the reciprocal idea of the Hithpael as described above seems applicable to leading others to the temple.
Yours,
Harold Holmyard
"It will be understood that ONLYwas intended to be a morphological or a semantic comment. Niphal, pual, hophal and hitpael are morphological categories, and it is possible that the morphological rules do not allow object suffixes to be attached to these morphological forms. However, it seems more likely that Weingreen's comments are intended to be understood as 1) "niphal, pual, hophal and hitpael are passives/reflexives"; 2) passives/reflexives "cannot govern an object", therefore 3) object suffixes are not found with niphal, pual, hophal and hitpael. The problem with this is not with the reasoning that 1) and 2) imply 3), but rather with the premises 1) and perhaps 2). For the rule in 1) is by no means invariable.
the active verbs can take suffixes, niphal, pual, hophal and hitpael are
passives/reflexives and cannot govern an object..."
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.