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
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.