I see you took this off list.
On 10/25/07, pporta AT oham.net <pporta AT oham.net> wrote:
> Pere:No. Because the verb ends in a heh, a common practice is that the heh
> On 10/25/07, pporta AT oham.net <pporta AT oham.net> wrote:
>> In Is 42:5 we find the word W:NW+YHM.
>> As it is, this is a Qal Participle, construct, plural masculine.
>> Should it not be in the singular, namely without yud?
>>
>> Or maybe this yud is important here?
>>
>> Pere Porta
>> Barcelona (Spain)
>
> This is a Qal singular participle with a third person plural suffix,
> from the verb N+H, treating $MYM as a plural.
_________
Then.... which is the purpose here of the letter yud after tet? In a
general way it would show plural, not singular. May we think this yud is a
"scribal" mistake?
Pere Porta
changes into a yod before a suffix. This does not change it to a
plural, just a linguistic practice.
Does that answer your question?
Karl W. Randolph.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.