Varda Books



 View book pages:
 Buy this book:
  eBookshuk
  




18 Introduction from

by Zeev Ben-Hayyim
18  Introduction from the treatment of b y in those languages: to* in Aramaic, J—% in Arabic. One who classifies Tin as does Ibn Janäh cannot support the claim of Ben Yehuda ( Thesaurus, VIII, 3594) s. v. ίπ, tha  the Qal stem is not found in early sources. b. The forms Vxrn and trtem in Isa 31: 5 would be defined by todays gram­marians as converted perfect 3rd pers. masc. sing. verbs in the Hifil stem, continuing the infinitive absolutes fm and rfioi, just as orwen in Jer 7: 10 contin-ues the string of infinitives nun nrj, etc., in the preceding verse. Ibn Janäh ( Kitäb al- Lüma, 336), however, interprets them as nfinitives, similar to ymn in Jer 31: 31 and αΐΒψπ in Jos 11: 14. There is no doubt that TH has a Hifil infinitive with hireq as the vowel of the preformative r ( BL, 333i), and such forms are not to be taken as corruptions or errors ( pace Bergsträsser, Grammatik, sec-tion on Hifil, § 19, note to paragraph l). Which classification is preferable cannot be determined. c. The form ] xa in Ex 7: 27 is understood by the common grammars  of Biblical Hebrew as a PVel participle with the preformative a deleted. 2 5 In  tradi-tional school grammars, however, it is taken to be an adjective and not  a verb, and so it is by Ben Yehuda ( Thesaurus, VI, 2763) as well. When Ibn Janäh ( Kitäb al- Usül, s. v. jxa) compares that form to ίπ^ ι in Zeph 1: 14 and David Qimhi adds πηψι in Eccl 4: 2, they surely classify ] XB, too, as a Piel. ( The term Hebrew nxn, includes what we classify as a participle.) A careful look at all the forms of this verb in the Bible taking into account only the unpointed text, though, shows that the PVel classification emerges from the Masoretic point­ing alone. Had the Masoretic tradition opted to vocalize those verbs in the Qal stem, as the unpointed text of Ex 7: 27 hints — then the form ] K? would occa­sion no surprise but instead be understand as a Qal participle. In this verb as with others, the Masoretes vocalize according to the practice in the later strata of the language, where ( in this instance) the PVel not the Qal, was  in common use, as the forms ruxa » , tmxaa, and ruon in the Mishna attest. 2 6  The Samaritan traditions treatment of verbs II- guttural ( see 2.2.2.0), in fact, provides  no rea­son to assume that ] xa here is in the PVel stem. Quite surprising is that recent scholars have overlooked the presence  of a Qal form of | xa in Syriac and have adopted farfetched explanations. 27 In either case, one may conclude  that even within the realm of Hebrew in the Tiberian tradition, the classification of a particular form may engender 2 5 So GKC § 52s; BL, 217. 2 6 See Ben- Hayyim, Tradition, 115. 2 7 This is especially surprising in regard to  Brockelmann, author of LS, who suggested ( GvG I, 264) the clever explanation that ] Xö DK reflects a haplology and also emended to D^ KSn in Jer 13: 10 accordingly. His explanation was adopted by BL, 217, and JM, 154, even though the unpointed verbs in their various forms in the Hebrew Bible and in Syriac make this view unnecessary. Chapter Home  | TOC  | Index t t t

Zoom in  zoom  Zoom out
  << Topic >>             |<   <<    Page       >>   >|  
18 Introduction from the treatment of b\\" y in those languages: to* in Aramaic, J—% in Arabic. One who classifies Tin as does Ibn Janäh cannot support the claim of Ben Yehuda ( Thesaurus, VIII, 3594) s. v. ίπ, tha \\" the Qal stem is not found in early sources.\\" b. The forms Vxrn and trtem in Isa 31: 5 would be defined by today's gram­marians as converted perfect 3rd pers. masc. sing. verbs in the Hifil stem, continuing the infinitive absolutes fm and rfioi, just as orwen in Jer 7: 10 contin-ues the string of infinitives nun nrj, etc., in the preceding verse. Ibn Janäh ( Kitäb al- Lüma', 336), however, interprets them as nfinitives, similar to ymn in Jer 31: 31 and αΐΒψπ in Jos 11: 14. There is no doubt that TH has a Hifil infinitive with hireq as the vowel of the preformative r ( BL, 333i), and such forms are not to be taken as corruptions or errors ( pace Bergsträsser, Grammatik, sec-tion on Hifil, § 19, note to paragraph l). Which classification is preferable cannot be determined. c. The form ] xa in Ex 7: 27 is understood by the common grammars of Biblical Hebrew as a PVel participle with the preformative a deleted. 2 5 In tradi-tional school grammars, however, it is taken to be an adjective and not a verb, and so it is by Ben Yehuda ( Thesaurus, VI, 2763) as well. When Ibn Janäh ( Kitäb al-' Usül, s. v. jxa) compares that form to ίπ^ ι in Zeph 1: 14 and David Qimhi adds πηψι in Eccl 4: 2, they surely classify ] XB, too, as a Pi'el. ( The term Hebrew nxn, includes what we classify as a participle.) A careful look at all the forms of this verb in the Bible taking into account only the unpointed text, though, shows that the PVel classification emerges from the Masoretic point­ing alone. Had the Masoretic tradition opted to vocalize those verbs in the Qal stem, as the unpointed text of Ex 7: 27 hints — then the form ] K? would occa­sion no surprise but instead be understand as a Qal participle. In this verb as with others, the Masoretes vocalize according to the practice in the later strata of the language, where ( in this instance) the PVel not the Qal, was in common use, as the forms ruxa » , tmxaa, and ruon in the Mishna attest. 2 6 The Samaritan tradition's treatment of verbs II- guttural ( see 2.2.2.0), in fact, provides no rea­son to assume that ] xa here is in the PVel stem. Quite surprising is that recent scholars have overlooked the presence of a Qal form of | xa in Syriac and have adopted farfetched explanations. 27 In either case, one may conclude that even within the realm of Hebrew in the Tiberian tradition, the classification of a particular form may engender 2 5 So GKC § 52s; BL, 217. 2 6 See Ben- Hayyim, Tradition, 115. 2 7 This is especially surprising in regard to Brockelmann, author of LS, who suggested ( GvG I, 264) the clever explanation that ] Xö DK reflects a haplology and also emended to D^ KSn in Jer 13: 10 accordingly. His explanation was adopted by BL, 217, and JM, 154, even though the unpointed verbs in their various forms in the Hebrew Bible and in Syriac make this view unnecessary. << Chapter >> Home | TOC | Index t t t
Zoom in  zoom  Zoom out
  << Topic >>             |<   <<    Page       >>   >|  

Varda Books - 1-59045-916-4


 Other related titles:
Hebrew-English Tanakh: the Jewish BibleHebrew-English Tanakh: the Jewish Bible

 Already viewed books:
A Grammar of Samaritan HebrewA Grammar of Samaritan Hebrew


TANAKH - INTERACTIVE HEBREW BIBLE