To: "'James Bowick'" <bowick AT idirect.com>, <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Cc:
Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] Observations on verb forms
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:11:08 -0500
Hi James,
I have produced a reference sheet of Hebrew roots which may be written
without all three radicals: http://s91279732.onlinehome.us/reference/Weak%20Roots.pdf
These include:
1-Yod (etymological 1-Waw)
1-Nun
2-Yod / 2-Waw
3-He (etymological 3-Yod)
2=3 (Geminates)
(On page two I also present them sorted by the two remaining visible
radicals.)
Note that the 1-Yod will not be present in the Qal imperative and Qal
infinitive construct, although these have no prefix.
Likewise for some 1-Nun verbs.
3-He is not present in Jussive and Wayyiqtol forms, even when no suffix is
present; and the Qal passive participle has 3-Yod.
> Am I
> right that if there is a verb with only two consonants of the
> root left in
> the form, there only four basic possibilities in
> reconstructing the root:
>
> 1. It is a bi-consonental root and can be looked up as is.
> 2. The final He has dropped. This could only be true if
> the root has a
> suffix.
> 3. An initial Yod or Nun has dropped. This could only be
> true if the root
> has a prefix.
> 4. The second and third letters are identical and have merged.
>
> If I am right this whole thing has just gotten a fair bit
> easier. Could
> someone confirm or deny this for me?