Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew: An Introduction 9781575066011

Citation preview

00-Blau.book Page i Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew

00-Blau.book Page ii Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic edited by

M. O’Connor† and Cynthia L. Miller

1. The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches, edited by Cynthia L. Miller 2. Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew: An Introduction, by Joshua Blau 3. A Manual of Ugaritic, by Pierre Bordreuil and Dennis Pardee 4. Word Order in the Biblical Hebrew Finite Clause: A Syntactic and Pragmatic Analysis of Preposing, by Adina Moshavi

00-Blau.book Page iii Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew An Introduction

Joshua Blau

Winona Lake, Indiana Eisenbrauns 2010

00-Blau.book Page iv Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

ç Copyright 2010 by Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.

www.eisenbrauns.com

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Blau, Joshua, 1919– [Torat ha-hegeh veha-tsurot. English] Phonology and morphology of Biblical Hebrew : an introduction / Joshua Blau. p. cm. — (Linguistic studies in Ancient West Semitic ; 2) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-57506-129-0 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Hebrew language—Phonetics. 2. Hebrew language—Phonology. 3. Hebrew language—Morphology. I. Title. PJ4576.B5513 2010 492.4u15—dc22 2010008908

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. †‘

00-Blau.book Page v Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Contents Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Publisher’s Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

1.1. Linguistics: Historical, Comparative, Synchronic . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2. A Short Description of Biblical Hebrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.3. Dialect Diversity in Biblical Hebrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.4. The Later History of Hebrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.5. Biblical Hebrew and Semitic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.6. A Family-Tree Model for Semitic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1.7. A Wave Model for Semitic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 1.8. Afro-Asiatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 1.9. Sound Shifts and Relative Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 1.10. Etymology and Sound Shifts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 1.10.1. Introduction 28 1.10.2. Etymology and Regular Sound Shifts 30 1.10.3. Etymology and “Weak” Sound Shifts 37 1.11. Change in Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 1.12. Reconstruction of Proto-Semitic Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 1.13. Internal Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 1.14. Exceptions to Sound Shifts, Real and Apparent . . . . . . . . . . 47 1.15. Analogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 1.16. Sound Shifts, Analogy, and Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 1.17. Loan Words, “Weak” Phonetic Change, and Pseudo-Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 1.18. Conflicts of Function and Language Change . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 1.19. Assimilation, Dissimilation, Metathesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 1.20. Divisions of the Study of Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

2. Phonetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 2.2. Consonants and Vowels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 2.3. Duration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 2.4. Place of Articulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 2.5. Resonance Chamber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

v

00-Blau.book Page vi Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Contents

vi

2.6. Voiced and Unvoiced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 2.7. Emphatics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 2.8. Summary of the Consonants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 2.9. Stress and Syllabification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

3. Phonology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 3.2. Hebrew and the Proto-Semitic Consonants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 3.2.1. Hebrew Script 73 3.2.2. An Example of Polyphony: ‡in 73 3.2.3. The Origins of Polyphonic Sin 74 3.2.4. Other Cases of Polyphony 75 3.2.5. Hebrew and Proto-Semitic Consonants 76 3.3. The Consonants of Hebrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 3.3.1. Classification of the Consonants 76 3.3.2. The BGDKPT Consonants 78 3.3.2.1. Stop-Spirant Contrast 78 3.3.2.2. The History of the Process 79 3.3.3. Laryngeals and Pharyngeals 81 3.3.3.1. Non-Gemination 81 3.3.3.2. Furtive pata˙ 83 3.3.3.3. Influence on Neighboring Vowels 84 3.3.3.4. A Historical Question 86 3.3.4. Aleph (Glottal Stop) 86 3.3.4.1. In the Writing System 86 3.3.4.2. Elision 87 3.3.4.3. Associated Vowel Shifts 88 3.3.4.4. Non-Radical Aleph 89 3.3.5. He (Laryngeal Fricative) 89 3.3.5.1. In the Writing System 89 3.3.5.2. History of Use in the Writing System 90 3.3.5.3. Elision 92 3.3.5.4. Assimilation 93 3.3.5.5. I-h Verbs 94 3.4. The Semi-Consonants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 3.4.1. Introduction 96 3.4.2. Diphthongs in aw, ay 96 3.4.3. Other Diphthongs in w/y 97 3.4.4. Triphthongs 97 3.4.5. Word-Final -aw, -ay 99 3.4.6. Word-Final -Cw, -Cy 102 3.4.7. Semi-Consonants and Weak Verbs 102

00-Blau.book Page vii Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

vii

Contents

3.4.8. The Semi-Consonant w 103 3.4.9. The Semi-Consonant y 105 3.5. The Vowels of Hebrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 3.5.1. Introduction: Vowel Systems 105 3.5.2. Tiberian Vocalization 106 3.5.3. Sephardic Pronunciation 108 3.5.4. Tiberian Vowels Once Again 110 3.5.5. Vowels: The Semitic Background 111 3.5.6. Vowels: The Hebrew Phonemes 112 3.5.6.1. The Basic System 112 3.5.6.2. The Problem of segol 112 3.5.6.3. The Problem of swa 113 3.5.6.4. Pronunciation of swa 116 3.5.6.5. The Problem of swa Again 117 3.5.6.6. The Transitional Character of Tiberian Hebrew 118 3.5.6.7. Other Vocalization Systems 118 3.5.7. The History of the Vowels 119 3.5.7.1. Short Vowels in Closed Syllables 119 3.5.7.2. Lengthening of Final a 121 3.5.7.3. Vowels in Open Penultimate Syllables 123 3.5.7.4. The Problem of Pretonic Lengthening 123 3.5.7.5. Explanations for Pretonic Lengthening 125 3.5.7.6. Pretonic Lengthening and Vowel Processes Related to a 129 3.5.8. The i and e Class Vowels (˙iriq, ßere, segol ) 132 3.5.9. The u and o Class Vowels (qibbuß, suruq, ˙olam, qamaß) 136 3.5.10. The Tiberian Vowels 137 3.5.11. On dages, mappiq, meteg, and maqqaf 138 3.5.12. Stress 143 3.5.12.1. Introduction 143 3.5.12.2. The History of Hebrew Stress 144 3.5.13. Pausal Forms 154

4. Morphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 4.1.1. Morphemes, Free and Bound 156 4.1.2. Parts of Speech 157 4.2. Pronouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 4.2.1. The Basics of Pronouns 158 4.2.2. Independent Personal Pronouns 159 4.2.2.1. Introduction 159

00-Blau.book Page viii Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Contents

4.2.2.2. First-Person Singular Independent Pronouns 159 4.2.2.3. Second-Person Singular Independent Pronouns 161 4.2.2.4. Third-Person Singular Independent Pronouns 162 4.2.2.5. Dual Independent Pronouns 164 4.2.2.6. First-Person Plural Independent Pronouns 165 4.2.2.7. Second-Person Plural Independent Pronouns 166 4.2.2.8. Third-Person Plural Independent Pronouns 168 4.2.3. Suffixed Personal Pronouns 168 4.2.3.1. Introduction 168 4.2.3.2. First-Person Singular Suffixes 168 4.2.3.3. Second-Person Singular Suffixes 169 4.2.3.4. Third-Person Masculine-Singular Suffixes 171 4.2.3.5. Third-Person Feminine-Singular Suffixes 172 4.2.3.6. First-Person Plural Suffixes 173 4.2.3.7. Second-Person Plural Suffixes 174 4.2.3.8. Third-Person Plural Suffixes 174 4.2.4. Demonstrative Pronouns 176 4.2.4.1. Deictic and Anaphoric Functions 176 4.2.4.2. Near and Far Demonstratives 176 4.2.4.3. Adjectival Function 177 4.2.4.4. Local, Temporal, Presentative Senses 178 4.2.4.5. Comparative Analysis 179 4.2.5. The Definite Article 179 4.2.6. Relative Pronouns 181 4.2.6.1. Syntactic Features 181 4.2.6.2. Origins of the Relative Pronouns 183 4.2.6.3. Interrogative Pronouns as Relatives 185 4.2.7. Interrogative Pronouns 186 4.3. Verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 4.3.1. Biradicalism and Triradicalism 187 4.3.2. Tenses 189 4.3.2.1. Introduction 189 4.3.2.2. Tense Approach 189 4.3.2.3. Bauer’s Approach 199 4.3.2.4. Aspectual Approaches 201 4.3.3. The Marking of Persons in the Imperative, the Prefix-Tense, and the Suffix-Tense 203 4.3.3.1. Person-Marking on Imperative 203 4.3.3.2. Person-Marking on the Prefix-Tense 204 4.3.3.3. Three Moods of the Prefix-Tense 206 4.3.3.4. Person-Marking of the Suffix-Tense 208

viii

00-Blau.book Page ix Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

ix

Contents

4.3.4. The Infinitive 212 4.3.4.1. Two Varieties of Infinitive 212 4.3.4.2. The Construct Infinitive 213 4.3.4.3. Absolute Infinitive 214 4.3.5. Verbal Themes 216 4.3.5.1. Introduction 216 4.3.5.2. Qal 219 4.3.5.2.1. Introduction 219 4.3.5.2.2. Suffix-Tense 220 4.3.5.2.3. Prefix-Tense 221 4.3.5.2.4. The Imperative 224 4.3.5.2.5. The Participles 225 4.3.5.2.6. The Infinitives 226 4.3.5.3. Nif ºal 227 4.3.5.4. Piººel 229 4.3.5.5. Puººal 232 4.3.5.6. Hitpaººel 232 4.3.5.7. Hif ºil 234 4.3.5.8. Hof ºal 236 4.3.6. Rare Verbal Themes 237 4.3.7. Phonological Variations 237 4.3.7.1. I-Laryngeals/Pharyngeals 237 4.3.7.2. II-Laryngeals/Pharyngeals 238 4.3.7.3. III-Laryngeals/Pharyngeals 239 4.3.8. The Weak Verbs 240 4.3.8.1. Introduction 240 4.3.8.2. Weak I-aleph Verbs 240 4.3.8.3. I-n Verbs 241 4.3.8.4. I-y(w) Verbs 243 4.3.8.5. III-aleph Verbs 248 4.3.8.6. III-y Verbs 248 4.3.8.7. II-w/y Verbs 252 4.3.8.7.1. Historical Derivation 252 4.3.8.7.2. Qal 252 4.3.8.7.3. Nif ºal 255 4.3.8.7.4. Hif ºil and Hof ºal 256 4.3.8.7.5. Piººel, Puººal, Hitpaººel 256 4.3.8.8. Mediae Geminatae Verbs 258 4.4. The Noun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 4.4.1. A Synopsis 260 4.4.2. Gender 263

00-Blau.book Page x Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Contents

x

4.4.3. Statuses: Absolute, Construct, Pronominal 265 4.4.4. The Cases 266 4.4.5. Dual and Plural 270 4.4.6. Nominal Patterns 274 4.5. Remarks on the Numerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 4.5.1. The Cardinal Numbers 279 4.5.2. The Ordinal Numbers 282

5.1. Remarks on Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 5.2. Remarks on Connective and Conversive Waw . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Paradigms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 Index of Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 Index of Scripture Citations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340 Index of Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344

00-Blau.book Page xi Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Abbreviations 1cs 2fp 2ms 3cd Akk Arab Aram BHeb D ET Heb PS Ug

first-person common singular second-person feminine plural, etc. second-person masculine singular, etc. third-person common dual Akkadian (Classical) Arabic Aramaic Biblical Hebrew The theme with doubled second radical (piººel, puººal, hitpaººel) English translation Hebrew Proto-Semitic Ugaritic

Bibliographical Abbreviations BDB = Brown, Driver, and Briggs 1907 Bergsträsser = Bergsträsser 1918–29 CAT = Dietrich, Loretz, and Sanmartín 1995 Grammar = Blau, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew 2, 1993 Middle Arabic = Blau, Studies in Middle Arabic and Its Judaeo-Arabic Variety (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1988) Studies = Blau, Studies in Hebrew Linguistics (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1996; in Hebrew) Topics = J. Blau, Topics in Hebrew and Semitic Linguistics (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1998) UT = Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965) Phonetic Symbols a å b2 C d6

(pata˙ –") open front vowel, unrounded (˙a†af pata˙ –“ ) ultra-short open unrounded front vowel, etc. the fricative counterpart of b, phonetically identical to v (any) consonant the conventional sign for Arabic ”, originally an emphatic fricative lateral (ß3) xi

00-Blau.book Page xii Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Abbreviations

q q5 e gö g% ˙ h k o pö q ¶ t V x æ æ* O

O* ´ ª º u * ¯

* .

õ yyy

xii

voiced th; also the fricative counterpart of d voiced emphatic th, ß3, in Arabic | (which is conventionally transcribed by z5) (ßere –E) a half-closed unrounded front vowel (gö ) the fricative counterpart of g, phonetically identical to g% voiced fricative velar (Arabic ˝), phonetically identical to gö j, voiceless fricative pharyngeal see x the fricative counterpart of k, phonetically identical to x (˙olam –o; in Sephardic tradition, this is the pronunciation of qamaß qa†an as well) rounded half-closed back vowel the fricative counterpart of p, phonetically identical to f uvular voiceless plosive c, originally voiceless lateral sibilant, today pronounced as s (BHeb c) voiceless th; also the fricative counterpart of t (any) vowel voiceless fricative velar (Arabic ˘, also transcribed h), phonetically identical to k (segol –Eå å˜aåK kana ªaxan li:, with tanwin -an (denoting the accusative), and it is much more tenable to regard this accusative as a development of the adverbial construction *‘he stood as a brother to me’ > ‘he was a brother to me’. Further, Lipinski suggests that the -a suffix of the Arabic perfect 3ms (e.g., fari˙a ‘he was glad’; cf. Lipinski 1997: 360, par. 40.3) reflects the predicative suffix of the ergative

00-Blau.book Page 25 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Sound Shift ∑ 1.9.3.

25

attached to an originally intransitive stative. This is not convincing, although it is not totally out of question. Were the final -a of fari˙a in fact a nominal ending, one wonders why in the 3fs (e.g., fari˙at ‘she was glad’) there is no trace of the -a ending (the form is not *fari˙ata), since everything indicates that the final -t was not followed by a vowel; cf., e.g., Bauer-Leander 1922: 309, par. 42g.

1.9. Sound Shifts and Relative Chronology 1.9.1. Consider the following groups of pairs of words in Hebrew and Arabic. A. Heb

q["z;

Arab zaºaqa ‘to cry’

Heb

lz'n;

Heb

zg'r;

B. Heb

jb"z;

Arab qaba˙a ‘to sacrifice’

‘to flow’; Arab nazala ‘to go down’

Heb

ˆz,aø&

Arab ªuqn ‘ear’

‘to be agitated’; Arab ªirtajaza ‘to thunder’

Heb

zj"a:

Arab ªaxaqa ‘to take’

In the six Hebrew words, z occurs twice in initial, twice in medial, and twice in final position, demonstrating that its use is not restricted to any special position in the word. In Group A, Heb z corresponds to Arab z, while in Group B, it is Arab q that matches Heb z. What is the reason for this different behavior? 1.9.2. For argument’s sake, let us begin by assuming that Hebrew, rather than Arabic, has preserved the original structure. This would mean that in Proto-Semitic these words exhibited z, and that it was Arabic that retained it in Group A and shifted it to q in Group B. Such a view would require that sound shifts be irregular and unpredictable, since there is no reason for the different behavior of the putative original z in Group B. As noted, the difference cannot be explained by the position of the sound in the word or root. 1.9.3. It cannot even be claimed that the different consonantal environment in these groups brought about the different behavior of supposed ProtoSemitic z, since such differences occur in identical environments as well. Even in identical (or very similar) roots, z occurs alongside q. Consider three examples. (1) Compare Heb [r'z;, Arab zaraºa ‘to sow’, with Heb ['/rz], Arab qiraº ‘arm’. (2) As we have seen, Heb ˆz,aø& corresponds to Arab ªuqn ‘ear’; nevertheless, Heb μyin'z& ]amø ‘scale’ matches Arab mizan. (3) Heb z[", root ºzz, ‘to be strong’ goes with Arab ºaziz, yet Heb zy[IhE, root ºwz, ‘to bring into safety’ matches Arab ªaºaqa, root ºwq. 1.9.3n. The root ‘to sow,’ Heb [r'z;, Arab zaraºa, presents a surprise in Ugaritic. There drº ‘to sow’ is attested. Since in Ugaritic d may correspond to q, this form attests, prima facie, PS qrº, contravening regular sound correspondences. I am, however, inclined to posit for Ugaritic original PS *zrº and attribute qrº to contamination with the synonymous qrª ‘to sow’; see §§1.10.3.5–6, p. 38, and §1.16.7, p. 52.

00-Blau.book Page 26 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

1.9.4. ∑ Sound Shift

26

In Heb μyin'z& ]amø ‘scale’, the a is surprising, since the word is to be derived, as demonstrated by Arabic, from the root wzn (>yzn), rather than from ªzn. Just as bv…/m ‘seat’, from the root wsb (>ysb), is spelled without a, so one would have expected μyin'z& ]amø without a as well. The a is due to the influence of μyin'z& ]a: ‘(two) ears’, since speakers were reminded of (two) ears by the two scales of the balance. It is interesting to note that in Biblical Aramaic (Dan 5:27) aY; n'z& ] amø is spelled with a as well, although in Aramaic ‘ear’ is derived from ªdn, and not from ªzn. This derivation makes the possibility of any impact of ªdn on moz´nayya quite unlikely. The aleph is due, no doubt, to the influence of Hebrew.

1.9.4. If we were to assume that it was only by chance that these roots split into two secondary roots, one containing z, the other q, this would be tantamount to positing anarchy in sound shifts. Therefore, such a view has to be abandoned. The analysis of the linguistic facts clearly demonstrates that sound shifts are regular, as long as other factors do not interfere. This assumption is not only demonstrated by hundreds and hundreds of cases of regular development in various languages and regular correspondences between related languages, but it has also enabled important findings that otherwise would not have been made. Therefore, a different assumption has to be made which does not contravene the basic principle of historical linguistics that sound shifts are regular. 1.9.5. We shall posit that it was Arabic, rather than Hebrew, that preserved the state of Proto-Semitic for z/q. In Hebrew PS q in every position has consistently shifted to z. Accordingly, we have to postulate historically the existence of two kinds of z in Hebrew. One (found in Group A), let us call it z1, stems from PS z and corresponds to z in Arabic and the other Semitic languages. The other, let us call it z2, originates in PS (and corresponds to Arab) q (as in Group B). The Proto-Semitic interdentals take on various identities, and this q was not quite stable in various Semitic languages: in Akkadian and in Ancient Ethiopic (Gºez) it shifted, as in Hebrew, to z; in Aramaic it shifted to d; in Classical Arabic and Epigraphic South Arabian it was preserved. 1.9.5n. The history of this interdental in Ugaritic is interesting (see further Blau 1968a = Topics, 339–41). At the time of the invention of the Ugaritic alphabet q still existed, and a special letter (the sixteenth in the Ugaritic alphabet) was invented for it. Nevertheless, at the time of the transmission of the Ugaritic literature, the sound had shifted to d (as in Aramaic). In some words the archaic spelling, marking q by a special letter, still obtained.

1.9.6. The chart below of some Hebrew words containing z2 and their correspondences (see p. 27) in other Semitic languages is not without interest. 1.9.6n. The Aramaic forms in the chart require a word of explanation: In Aramaic b, g, d, k, p, t after vowels have shifted, as in Biblical Hebrew, to spirants; accordingly, d after vowels has become q, which here, however, does not represent PS q but an allophone of q. Similarly PS b has become b2 . The -a suffixed to Aramaic nouns serves, originally at least, as a postpositive definite article. The noun with the article is said to be in the “emphatic state.” Regarding Ugaritic ªaxd, note that the archaic spelling ªaxq is attested as well. Aram deb2 a means ‘jackal’, and Ethiopic (Gºez) z´ªb means ‘hyena’. Akkadian nominal forms

00-Blau.book Page 27 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

SoundqShift > z ∑ 1.9.9.

27

‘to sacrifice’ ‘ear’ ‘to take’ ‘wolf’ ‘fly’

Heb

Akk

Aram

Ugar

Arab

Gºez

jb"z;

—

dOba˙

db˙

qaba˙a

zab˙a

ˆz,aø&

uzn(um)

ªuqna

ªudn

ªuqn(un)

ª´zn

zj"a:

axaz(um) ªå˙aq

ªaxd

ªaxaqa

ªaxaza

baEz]

zib(um)

—

qiªb(un)

z´ªb

—

qubab(un) z´nb

bWbz]

debõa

zubb(um) dabbabõa

terminate in -um (we are quoting Akkadian verbs in the infinitive form), Arabic forms end in -un. Gºez z´nb reflects the dissimilation of bb (in original *z´bb) to nb.

1.9.7. As shown, the correspondences between the various Semitic languages are entirely regular. Heb z2, for which we posit PS q, as preserved, e.g., in Arabic, always corresponds to Akk and Ethiopic z and Aram and Ugaritic d. It is this empirical regularity that serves as the basis of the determining principle of linguistics, viz., that sound shifts are regular. 1.9.8. The notions of the historical relationship between languages and of the regularity of sound shifts have been shaped only since the last quarter of the eighteenth century (see §§1.5.3–1.5.4, p. 13). The principle of the regularity of phonetic change was especially stressed from the 1870s on by the Junggrammatiker or Neogrammarian school, which was at first centered around the University of Leipzig. These scholars, somewhat unfortunately, called the sound shifts sound laws (Lautgesetze) and thus initiated a long and not very fruitful discussion about the extent to which these sound laws may be compared with natural laws. In their opinion sound “laws” operated blindly and with blind necessity. The most important practical distinction between sound shifts and natural laws is that the latter are eternal, whereas sound shifts are restricted in time. Phonetic changes operate for a certain time, after which habits of pronunciation may change and thus induce different sound shifts. 1.9.8n. Neogrammarian slogans include Hermann Osthoff’s formulation, “Die Lautgesetze wirken blind, mit blinder Notwendigkeit” (“Sound laws operate blindly, with blind necessity”), and the statement of Osthoff and Brugmann, “Aller Lautwandel, so weit er mechanisch vor sich geht, vollzieht sich nach ausnahmslosen Gesetzen” (“Every sound change, insofar as it proceeds mechanically, is completed according to exceptionless laws” (Osthoff and Brugman 1878: xiii).

1.9.9. As we have seen (§1.9.5), PS q had shifted in Hebrew to z. At a certain period speakers of Hebrew became unable to pronounce q and constantly substituted z for it. At a later period, other phonetic changes arose, which once more introduced q into Hebrew. At this period d after vowels became spirantized, i.e., it shifted to q. If the sound shift q to z had still operated at this period, d should have first shifted to q, and afterwards to z. Accordingly, we have

00-Blau.book Page 28 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

1.9.10. ∑ Relative Chronology; Etymology

28

to posit that at the time of the spirantization of d the sound shift q to z had ceased to operate. 1.9.9n. We are speaking here of sounds. As a matter of fact, a great difference between the functions of q in these two periods obtains. In the first period, it was a phoneme, in the second, initially at least, a mere allophone. See §3.3.2.1, p. 78, on the spirantization of d, along with b, g, k, p, t.

1.9.10. The recognition that sound shifts are restricted in their operation enables us often to establish their relative chronology. It is clear that the spirantization of d is later than the shift of q to z; that is, the shift of q to z preceded the spirantization of d after vowels and had already ceased to operate when the spirantization occurred. (It is not possible to determine in the same way the absolute chronology of these shifts, i.e., to establish the actual periods in which they took place.) 1.9.11. The shift of q to z occurred under every circumstance; it is unconditioned, and because of its operation q completely disappeared from ancient Hebrew. In contrast, the shift of d to q occurred only after vowels; it was conditioned, and therefore d not after a vowel remained in Hebrew and did not disappear.

1.10. Etymology and Sound Shifts 1.10.1. Introduction 1.10.1.1. Etymology deals with the original formation and meaning of words. Greek etymos means ‘true’, as if the ‘true’ meaning were at stake, based, it seems, on the Stoic notion that the original meaning of each word was onomatopoetic (an imitation of sound), disclosing the initial connection between the sound of the word and the object or action it marks. For the most part, etymology is diachronic, attempting to trace the history of words by finding out their early forms and meanings, and working back, as far as the existing documents allow. Comparative etymology attempts to discover the affinity between the vocabularies of related languages. It is customary to base the etymology of biblical vocabulary on comparative evidence, the more so because it is of limited extent only. Judiciously done, it is of no mean importance. An example will suffice to illustrate our claim. 1.10.1.1n. For the vocabulary of Biblical Hebrew, see the various editions of Wilhelm Gesenius’ dictionaries of Biblical Hebrew. The first German lexicon was published in 1812, while the Latin lexicon appeared in 1835–58. The best known dictionary in the Gesenius tradition and the most widely used English biblical lexicon is the excellent, though somewhat outdated, work of F. Brown, S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs (1907), generally quoted as BDB. In the same tradition, in German, and up to the same standard is the likewise somewhat obsolete dictionary of F. Buhl (1915), nominally the seventeenth edition of Gesenius’ German work.

00-Blau.book Page 29 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

29

Etymology ∑ 1.10.1.3.

More modern dictionaries, such as the various editions of the work of Ludwig Koehler and W. Baumgartner, are not up to the same standard, with the notable exception of their Aramaic portion, composed and guided by Baumgartner (Koehler and Baumgartner 1953, 1958, 1996, 2000; Holladay 1971; Reymond 1991). E. Klein has published A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English (1987).

1.10.1.2. The biblical verb jf"B: denotes, as a rule, ‘to be confident, secure’, as Judg 18:7 j'fEbøW fqEvø ‘secure and confident’. A problem arises with Jer 12:5. The verse begins with the exclamation: ËyaEw ] ÚWa& l} Y' w' hT:x}r'& μylIg]r'Ata< yKI μysIWSh"Ata< hr,j“t"T‘} because [if ] you have run with footmen and they have wearied you, then how can you contend with horses?’ It continues: μ/lv… ≈r,a ‘to lie’ > ‘to lie in security, to be secure’, as in Ps 22:10–11: μj d; in Ugaritic, as a rule, as in other Semitic languages, z1 is preserved. As a matter of fact, however, drº reflects the blend of the PS doublet ‘to sow’ zrº and qrª, which gave rise to Ugaritic qrº ‘to sow’. Another case in point is perhaps Heb ˚sm ‘to mix’; this seems to correspond to Arabic msj, which, according to regular sound correspondence, should appear as Heb ˚cm*, rather than ˚sm. It is not unlikely that the samekh is due to the impact of ˚sn in the same sense. In this instance, accordingly, words with similar sense were attracted in form, as in the Ugaritic case. Similarly, the form in Dan 8:13 yni/ml}P" ‘someone’ reflects the contamination of the two synonyms yni/lP} and yni/ml}a".

spread is 12 points short

00-Blau.book Page 53 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

53

Suppletion; Loan Words ∑ 1.17.1.

1.16.7n. BHeb gz,m:& ‘mixture’ (pausal form) belongs with Aramaic mzg ‘to mix’ (loaned into Arabic). These forms suggest that it is possible that there was an original Semitic root msk, related to mzg, and that this was the source of Heb ˚sm ‘to mix’. Morover, the s of msk may reflect the late spelling of s for ¶, because they came to coincide in pronunciation (see Blau 1970c: 117).

1.16.8. Inversely, words with similar form are apt to converge in sense as well. It may well be that the many groups of verbs with the first two radicals identical (like drp ‘to divide’, ≈rp ‘to break through’, [rp ‘to let loose’, etc.) and related meanings, reflect, partly at least, development of such lexical contaminations, rather than residues of ancient biradicalism. 1.16.9. Analogy and frequency interact in complex ways. Paradigmatic pressure does not always suffice to eliminate paradigmatic differences. A case in point is provided by the independent personal pronouns (ynia“ – hT:a" – aWh, etc.). Because of their extraordinary frequency (see §1.16.4, p. 51), they were less exposed to analogical leveling. Nonetheless, cases of analogy do occur even in these very frequent words; Wnj}n'a& “ ‘we’ arose from the expected form Wnj}n' & (attested in the Bible and also epigraphically) through the analogical impact of ynia“ ‘I’. 1.16.10. Suppletion or metaplastic formation involves paradigms derived from different bases. This occurs with less frequent words as well, such as ‘to be good’ qal suffix-tense b/f, root †wb, qal prefix-tense bf"yyi, root y†b. In the hif ºil, forms derived from †wb and y†b alternate and are pronounced the same, although spelled differently, byfImE, byfIymE. In some cases, suppletion reveals rather intricate linguistic development, as in the suppletion of the apparent puººal jQ' lU ‘he was taken’ in the suffix-tense by the apparent hof ºal jQ' y u in the prefix-tense. On closer inspection, both sets of forms turn out to represent the qal passive (see §4.3.5.1.2, p. 217). Consider the use of the qal suffix-tense of lvk ‘to fall’ alongside the nif ºal prefix-tense (lvæK: – lv´K:yi); the nif ºal suffixtense and the qal prefix-tense are rare. This pattern presumably attests to an earlier qal, which was later superseded by the nif ºal. The Masoretes vocalized the prefix-tense lçky, etc., which could be interpreted both as qal (lvøk}yi *) and nif ºal (lv´K:yi), according to the late usage of nif ºal. They were, however, prevented from doing so in the suffix-tense lvæK:, etc., because of the absence of the nun. 1.16.10n. On Heb lvk ‘to fall’, see Ginsberg 1929–30.

1.17. Loan Words, “Weak” Phonetic Change, and Pseudo-Corrections 1.17.1. We have already noted that loan words may reflect deviations from sound shifts, but these are only apparent, since such words exhibit the sound

00-Blau.book Page 54 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

1.17.2. ∑ “Weak” Phonetic Change; Pseudo-Corrections

54

system of their original languages (§1.10.3.4, p. 37; §1.10.3.7, p. 38). In a Hebrew doublet for ‘to watch’, rx"n; shows agreement with Hebrew sound shifts, and rf"n; reflects Aramaic shifts. Two such doublets in Hebrew exhibiting s2 in the genuine Hebrew form and t in the form loaned from Aramaic are v/rB} /t/rB} ‘cypress?’ and vr'j: ‘to plough’/ tr'j: ‘to incise, engrave’. In the last case, the loan word has a slightly different meaning from that of the genuine Hebrew word. 1.17.2. Through deviations from regular sound shifts, as well as through the not entirely predictable processes of assimilation, dissimilation, haplology, and metathesis (see §1.19, pp. 57ff.), low-yield diachronic correspondences arise, which were described by Yakov Malkiel as “ ‘weak’ phonetic change.” The weakness may be due not to unpredictability but to rarity, as in the case with iw > u (§1.16.2, p. 51), a true sound shift, which became quite exceptional in Hebrew by morphological analogical pressure. 1.17.2n. On “weak” phonetic change, see Malkiel 1962; Blau 1977e = Topics, 50–103.

1.17.3. Hypercorrections and pseudo-corrections in general may be conducive to “weak” phonetic change as well. Whenever two forms of a language clash and one is more prestigious than the other, the speaker of the lower form is apt to imitate the higher one. Often s/he lacks apposite knowledge and uses an in-between form, non-existent at least in the given environment. Such a form is neither at home in the person’s own (lower) speech (because s/he “corrected” the form s/he would have used) nor in the higher language (because s/he was not able to produce the form used there). Such a form may be called pseudo-correct (Blau 1970c). If the speaker overshoots the mark and uses a “higher” form, although the higher language demanded a form similar to that used in the lower speech, we speak of a hypercorrection. Such forms may become productive and eventually may become a part of the language. 1.17.4. In Biblical Hebrew, monosyllabic nouns as a rule become bisyllabic through the insertion of an anaptyctic vowel and are stressed on the penult. Thus *malk ‘king’ becomes Ël yippol ‘he will fall’. (For exceptions, see §3.3.1.9, p. 77.) The assimilation in this case is total (because the n becomes totally identical with the following consonant, in our case p). It is also regressive (because the following sound, the p, assimilated it in a backward movement) and continuous (because the assimilated n and the assimilating p were in direct contact, without any interrupting sound). 1.19.3. Also frequent and regular is the assimilation of the t of the hitpaººel to a preceding sibilant: qDef"x}hI < *hißtaddeq ‘he justified himself’. Here the assimilation is apparently grammatically conditioned, since it is limited to the hitpaººel only. Through the impact of the directly preceding emphatic ß, t became emphatic as well, i.e., it shifted to †. In this case too, the assimilation is continuous, but it is only partial (the t has not become ß) and progressive, because it was the preceding sound that assimilated to the following one. 1.19.3n. This account depends on the assumption that this assimilation is later than the metathesis of the first-radical sibilant and the t of the hitpaººel. If it is so, then *hitßaddeq first became *hißtaddeq and only then did the t become †. If the assimilation occurred earlier than the metathesis, the assimilation is regressive: *hitßaddeq became *hi†ßaddeq and then by metathesis qDef"x}hI. This, however, is less likely, since then one would have expected the t of the hitpaººel to be assimilated to a following q as well, which is not the case (cf. vDeqt " }hI ‘he was hallowed’).

1.19.4. According to the testimony of other Semitic languages, the original form of yyid]Gi ‘my lamb’ was *gaqyi. In this case a, a vowel, is assimilated to the (half-)consonant y. The assimilation is discontinuous, partial, and regressive. Monosyllabic nouns like *malk ‘king’ became, through an anaptyctic vowel, disyllabic: *málæk. By assimilation of a to the æ, it shifted to Ël *['v¨/y > ['Wvye, from which Jesus stems. In these cases, the dissimilation is, as often, regressive. 1.19.9. Progressive vowel dissimilation is found in special cases. In alEWl ‘if not’ = Wl + alø it is progressive, presumably because the preservation of Wl was more important for communication (marking a condition) than that of alø ‘not’. In verb forms such as zjEayo ‘he will take’ < *yo˙uz, special conditions also prevail: regressive dissimilation would have given rise to *ye˙uz. This form is odd: the verbal prefix ye-, to be sure, does exist (lq"ye, r/aye , v/bye ‘he is small’, ‘it is dawning’, ‘he is shamed’), but it is marginal. Moreover, there was morphological pressure from the parallel hp zjE&aO arose. 1.19.10n. For the place of the stress in the last form, see §3.5.12.2.18, p. 153. This account condenses the historical development of the conjugation of the prefix-tense of zja. At first, it seems, the ª of the root disappeared in the 1cs prefix-tense by dissimilation, in order to

00-Blau.book Page 59 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

59

Haplology; Lexicography ∑ 1.20.2.

avoid two glottal stops in the same syllable, and the preceding a was lengthened (ªaª > a) to become later, by the Canaanite shift, o. Only later, through paradigmatic analogy, did long o, not followed by the glottal stop, spread through the whole paradigm of the qal prefix-tense: zjEayo, zjEaTø.

1.19.11. Haplology is a special case of total consonant dissimilation, mentioned in the example of zjE&aO. In Biblical Hebrew, this feature is perhaps attested in the phrase hT:a" ˆaEm: μaI ‘if you refuse’ (Exod 7:27; 9:2; 10:4; Jer 38:21), if indeed it stands for ªim *m´maªen . . . (with the piººel participle) and does not represent an archaic qal participle. In this case, the vowel following the totally dissimilated consonant disappears as well, so that the whole syllable is omitted. Thus, it makes sense that jt"P lyv¥k}m" ‘causing to stumble’; *yuhaºmad > dm"[’y; ‘he will be presented’. 3.3.5.3.3.2. Case 2. he generally elides in the definite article ha- after the prepositions b´, k´, l´ ‘in, as, to’, e.g., μyim"&V…B" ‘in the heaven’; retention of he is rare, e.g., μyim"&V…h"B.} Note that this elision is not found after the conjunction w] ‘and’. 3.3.5.3.3.3. Case 3. Rarely is he elided from the ha- of the hif ºil infinitive after the same prepositions, e.g., ayfIj“l" ‘to cause to sin’ Eccl 5:5 < *l´ha˙å†i. 3.3.5.3.3.3n. The original form of *l´ha˙å†i was *laha˙å†iª; the last syllable is irrelevant here.

3.3.5.3.3.4. Case 4. he regularly elides in the directional h: hx:r]a& " ‘toward the ground’. (The he that is written is simply a vowel letter.)

spread is 12 points long

00-Blau.book Page 93 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

Elision of he; Assimilation ∑ 3.3.5.4.1.

93

3.3.5.3.3.4n. Ugaritic spelling demonstrates the originally consonantal character of this morpheme. This h was attached to the noun in the accusative, i.e., the immediate constituents of, e.g., hx:r]a"& were *ªarßa + h; thus h stood at the meeting-point of two morphemes and was therefore elided.

3.3.5.3.3.5. Case 5. he elides from the third-person pronominal suffixes in which it occurred between two vowels, the first of which was (originally) short: /ryv¥ ‘his song’ < *siraw < *sirahu. 3.3.5.3.3.5n. Note that when he was preceded by a long vowel in a third-person pronominal suffix, it was preserved: h:ybI&a: ‘her father’; WhybI&a: ‘his father’. The last form exists alongside the more “advanced” form wybIa:, in which the h was elided, both because of allegro pronunciation and since, in the wake of forms like wyr;yv¥ ‘his songs’, the w was felt to be the mark of the 3ms pronominal suffix. In the form WhaE&r]m" ‘his sight’ < *marªayihu, the retention of the he is noteworthy: the elision of h after short vowels must have taken place later than the monophthongization of ayi; otherwise, the h would have been elided.

3.3.5.3.4. There are a number of exceptions to these patterns, resulting from various forms of analogy. Exception 1: A form like μr;m:v‘ ‘he kept them’, instead of the expected *s´marem < *s´maraym < *s´marahim, reflects the aending preceding pronominal suffixes characteristic of the suffix-tense; cf. ynir'&m:v‘/Hr;m:v‘/Wnr;&m:v‘ ‘he kept me/ her/ us’. Exception 2: The monographic prepositions also show analogies. The form μh wyr;yv¥ siraw ‘his songs’. 3.3.5.3.5n. This elision must predate the monophthongization of ay; had the diphthong shifted to e, the h would have been preceded by a long vowel and therefore would have been preserved. The preservation of the h in h:yr,&yv¥, μh hn,/mv‘ ‘eight (fs)’. The problem is how to account for the lowering of final -iyu, -iyi to e and even more for the shift of final -iy to œö, rather than to i. For various attempts to provide an explananation for these changes, see the literature cited below. With due reservations, I would like to propose the following: since the inflection of nouns and verbs terminating in -ay and -iy to a great degree neutralized their differences when preceding long vowels or a, words ending in -iyu/i and -iy were transferred to the category of those terminating in -ayu/i and -ay, respectively. Thus, e.g., because of the formal identity of t/py; ‘beautiful ones (fp)’ < *yapiyot and t/dc… ‘fields’ < *¶adayot,

00-Blau.book Page 102 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

3.4.6. ∑ w/y

102

the expected s abs *yapöi < *yapiyu, by analogy to hd,c…, became hp †O) and the originally mobile swa (B}*) to quiescent swa (here, swa medium; see below, §3.5.6.3.6).

3.5.6.3.3. In forms like miq´qas and haß´pöino, the dages in the letters bearing the swa does not indicate gemination; rather, it means that the swa is mobile (which entailed the spirant pronunciation of the following bgdkpt). This feature is quite rare when the letter following the swa is not a bgdkpt letter, e.g., th"Q}yi ‘the obedience(?) of’, pronounced yiq´hat Gen 49:10. 3.5.6.3.4. It is surprising to find words in which the letter vocalized with swa and dages is b, which, because of the dages, has to be pronounced as plosive, although it is preceded by a vowel. (Spirantization at a certain point ceased to be productive in word-medial position; §3.3.2.2.5, p. 80.) There is no reason to double the b. In the cases to be cited, the fact that it is preceded by qibbuß, rather than by qamaß qa†an, may be interpreted as indicating doubling; this, however, is unlikely: /lB’sU ‘his burden’ Isa 10:27, with ˙a†af qamaß instead of mobile swa, pronounce subO"lo, instead of the expected *sub2 ´lo; cf. /kÉB}SUmI ‘from its thicket’ Jer 4:7, pronounce missub´ko. 3.5.6.3.5. The reverse phenomenon, the occurrence of a quiescent swa instead of a mobile one, is common. Indeed it is not only single words but whole word classes that reflect this feature, dependent, it seems, on the speed of recitation, the conditions of stress, and the consonantal environment. 3.5.6.3.6. Perhaps the most conspicuous category of words reflecting the shift of mobile swa to the quiescent one includes words with the so-called swa medium, a special sort of quiescent swa, which arose by the reduction of an

00-Blau.book Page 115 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

115

Vocalic swa Phonemes Medium ∑ 3.5.6.3.8.

original full vowel (and was, therefore, originally a mobile swa) and is preceded by a short vowel. Through the influence of the reduced vowel, a following bgdkpt letter became spirantized and remained so even after the reduced vowel has been omitted. At the time of the loss of the vowel, the stop-spirant alternation of the bgdkpt letters was no longer automatic, so that the bgdkpt letters did not automatically change back to stops after the vowel had disappeared. The vowel preceding this swa is short (for a possible explanation of this phenomenon, see below). 3.5.6.3.6n. Phonetically only two kinds of swa exist, either mobile or quiescent; there exists no phonetic entity intermediate between an ultra-short vowel and zero. Nevertheless, Solomon Hanau, the ingenious Hebrew grammarian from the first half of the eighteenth century who introduced the term swa medium into scholarship, considered it a phonetic reality. Following Bergsträsser 2.176 we use the term to refer to a (synchronically) quiescent swa, preceded, like other quiescent swa, by a short vowel, yet apparently capable of bringing about the spirantization of a following bgdkpt letter, as if it were a mobile swa. It is indeed convenient to use this term to describe a quite complex synchronic situation. In the various ancient sources other vowels appear instead of swa medium, reflecting the earlier stage when it was still a mobile swa. Such evidence is found in the Samaritan tradition, the Septuagint, the Hexapla, and the Dead Sea Scrolls; see Blau 1971a: 26–33 = Topics, 210–17; Ben-Óayyim 2000: 55 and n. 71. In the Tiberian tradition, too, there are remnants of what we call swa medium being pronounced as mobile swa, marked by meteg, as in hk:r;b}hâ " (the pata˙ being marked by meteg) ‘blessing?’ Gen 27:38, or marked by a ˙a†af, as in a variant reading of the same passage, hk:r;b“h" and in bhæz“W ‘and the gold of ’ Gen 2:12. The historical development of the swa medium was originally described by Eduard Sievers; cf. Bergsträsser 1.120–21.

3.5.6.3.7. This swa medium is found in plural construct qa†l nouns. Thus ykEÉl}m" ‘the kings of’ arose from *malake (cf. μykIl:m} ‘kings’). The form is pronounced malke, with a spirantized k, because at the time the spirantization was active the k was preceded by a mobile swa. Some qal infinitives construct also show swa medium, e.g., after b´, k´, as in lpøÉn]BI ‘when it fell’, lpøÉn]KI ‘as one falls’, pronounce binpöol, kinpöol, derived from lpøÉn], pronounced n´pöol. 3.5.6.3.7n. The qal infinitives construct present a complex picture, since after l´ followed by bgdkpt the form has a quiescent swa. Such forms as rBOv‘lI ‘in order to break’ are due to morphological reshuffling on analogy to the prefix-tense (rBOv‘yi ‘he will break’) rather than to a genuine sound shift. The late date of this feature is indicated by forms like lPOn]lI ‘that I fall’ Ps 118:13; the n immediately preceding another consonant was not assimilated to it because at the time of the action of this shift the n was still followed by a mobile swa. (Alternatively, one could suggest that this shift was still active, but that at the time of the vocalization of the biblical text its letters had already become hallowed and therefore the n of lpnl could not be omitted. Cf. Ginsberg 1929–30: 129–31.)

3.5.6.3.8. The replacement of mobile swa by quiescent swa is also reflected in the strong tendency (cf. above, §3.3.2.2.3, pp. 79–80) to pronounce double consonants followed by mobile swa as simple consonants followed by quiescent swa, e.g., y[Es}m" ‘journeys of’ = masºe Num 33:1, instead of the expected *mass´ºe. Moreover, the addition of prosthetic aleph to words beginning with

00-Blau.book Page 116 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

3.5.6.4. ∑ Vocalic swa Phonemes

116

a mobile swa intimates that the mobile swa had become quiescent; the difficulty of pronouncing a consonant cluster at the beginning of words then led to the addition of the prosthetic aleph. Cf. ['/rz] ‘arm’ (with mobile swa) and ['/rz]a< (with prosthetic aleph). Similarly, l/mT} : l/mt}a< ‘yesterday’.

3.5.6.4. Pronunciation of swa 3.5.6.4.1. The following five rules of swa (first proposed by Elijah Levita (Ba˙ur), 1468–1549) may assist the student in differentiating mobile and quiescent swa. (1) Swa is mobile in word-initial position, e.g., ˆm:z] ‘time’, (2) and quiescent in word-final position, e.g., Ël"m: ‘he reigned’; T}a" ‘you’ [fs]). (3) The first of two consecutive swas is quiescent, the second mobile, e.g., h[:m}v‘a rm"v…) because no paradigmatic pressure existed.

3.5.7.2.4. The final a in the prefix-tense (where it originally marked volition) was maintained in the Hebrew cohortative (see §4.3.2.2.6, p. 192), because the paradigmatic pressure of the cohortative-jussive mood was pronounced, e.g., hr;m}v‘a< ‘let me preserve’. 3.5.7.2.5. The final a of the accusative case, which, after the omission of final i and u, occurred in the opposition -a (= accusative, including adverbial) : W (representing nominative-genitive). In this opposition the paradigmatic pressure was less manifest. On the one hand, the former genitive was superfluous, since it was sufficiently indicated by the preceding construct or preposition, and, on the other hand, the accusative, i.e., the direct object, was clearly enough differentiated from the subject not only by word order (since it usually followed the subject), but also by Ata *yaºåz´b2 u > Wbz]["y' ‘they will leave’. Through the influence of the laryngealpharyngeal, the emerging vowel is a, rather than i. For the special behavior of construct nouns without pretonic lengthening, see §3.5.7.6.8 below. 3.5.7.6.8. The traditional explanation that when two swas collide, the first turns into ˙iriq is sometimes difficult to justify. In particular, it is more difficult to account for such plural construct forms as t/bn]z' ‘the tails of’; t/pn]K" ‘the extremities of’; ykEl}m" ‘the kings of’; yv´d]j: ‘the months of’. According to the accepted linguistic method, the original vowel has been preserved here; the traditional explanation would have to posit paradigmatic leveling. Such leveling seems apt, especially in segolates of the qatl/qutl pattern, in which the a/u (o) vowels clearly stand out. 3.5.7.6.9. The derivation of the short vowel preceding swa medium from two consecutive mobile swas is of special importance, since it accounts in a simple way for the short, rather than long, vowel preceding an originally mobile swa, which entailed spirantization of a following bgdkpt. 3.5.7.6.9n. This theory is based on the assumption of an early date of the spirantization. Bergsträsser (1.40, 121, 165), to be sure, postulated a much later date, since, in his view, spriantizaton is later than the disappearance of ˙2 (phonetically very close to k) and º2 (phonetically very close to gö), which are still attested in the Septuagint. Nevertheless, it is possible for a phoneme and its allophone to coexist (see §3.2.4.2, pp. 75–76). Accordingly, it stands to reason that spirantization was, indeed, an early feature.

3.5.7.6.10. A major class of exceptions to pretonic lengthening is formed by nouns in construct (see §3.5.7.4.2n, p. 123), as well as prepositions preceding nouns. These do not exhibit pretonic lengthening because the stress falls on the following (governed) noun: *wa-ßadaqat ‘and the righteousness of’ shifts to *w´ß´d´qat > tq"d]xIw]. Since the main stress is on the following noun, in construct nouns and in prepositions all the open unstressed syllables, including the pretonic one, were reduced. This is also the reason that the case endings in construct were dropped earlier than in the absolute. 3.5.7.6.10n. The status of these exceptions is not uniform: in ceremonial recitation, as reflected by the cantillation marks, these nouns serve as full musical units. The pattern we have described would have been found in ordinary speech.

3.5.7.6.11. As a rule, pretonic lengthening is limited to the actual penultimate syllable. When (over the course of a derivation) the stress moves, an (originally penultimate) short vowel can be reduced. It happens in rare instances that a new base with a long vowel is extracted from the form containing a pretonic lengthened vowel, and other forms are then derived from the new base. Thus from hp:y; ‘beautiful (woman)’, we have ytIp:y; ‘my beautiful woman’. Usually, also, ßere stemming from originally short i (as in μyniqez] ‘old ones’) is reduced in open syllables in construct (i.e., far from the stress). The preservation of such a ßere in the second syllable of ynev´y] ‘sleeping’ (p cstr)

00-Blau.book Page 132 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

3.5.7.6.12. ∑ Pretonic Gemination; Attenuation

132

indicates that the first ßere behaves as an originally long vowel, which must be preserved in every position. In other words, a new base with this pretonic long e (μyniv´y] ‘sleeping ones’) is formed, from which other forms are derived. This process was furthered by the disappearance of the quantitative phonemic differences between vowels in the Tiberian system; short and long ßere were no longer phonemically distinguished. Thus forms like ynev´y] also reflect the tendency to preserve originally short ßere in the whole paradigm, as if it were originally long. 3.5.7.6.11n. The long and short vowels are not always treated in this way. The case of qamaß is quite different. Originally long qamaß, when stressed, shifted to o (the Canaanite shift; see §3.5.9.2, p. 136). Originally short qamaß, changing with the shift of stress, became much more frequent than unchanging qamaß (since the latter had shifted to o). Therefore originally unchanging qamaß tends to be reduced like originally short qamaß. Compare the form with the reduced vowel, ˆn;[:h< b["B} ‘in the darkness of the cloud’ Exod 19:9, in contrast to the form with the preservation of the qamaß, lf" b[:K} ‘as the cloud of dew’ Isa 18:4. For ˙olam, see §3.5.9.1n, p. 136.

3.5.7.6.12. Pretonic gemination, i.e., the doubling of a consonant following the penultimate vowel, is parallel to pretonic lengthening; both processes enable the preservation of an originally open penultimate syllable with a short vowel. Unlike pretonic lengthening, pretonic gemination tends to affect the noun base. A new base emerges, containing the geminated consonant, and is the source of all the other forms: μyLIm"G} ‘camels’‚ μk tB" ‘daughter’ (rather than *bet), *gint > tG" ‘wine-press’ (rather than *get). This process, first described by F. W. Philippi, is known as Philippi’s Law. In a sense, it seems the opposite of attenuation, but the processes are not analogous. 3.5.8.5n. For the original statement, see Philippi (1878), cf. Blau 1986 = Studies, 12–16).

3.5.8.6. Philippi’s Law is limited in its application. It applies to the final syllables of construct forms, but not absolute forms (where the ˙iriq shifts to ßere): cstr ˆq"z], abs ˆqez; ; cstr rx"j“, abs rxEj: ‘court’. Further, it is well attested in closed syllables with penultimate stress, e.g., hn;r]a"&V…TI ‘they (f) will remain’, cf. raEV…TI ‘she will remain’; hn;d]l" &TE ‘they (f) will bear’, cf. dlETE ‘she will bear’. In two small noun classes, Philippi’s Law applies to absolute forms, geminate and segolate nouns. These nouns originally terminated in two consonants, and therefore even before the loss of the case endings they contained a closed syllable:* bittu > tB" ‘daughter’; *ßidqu > *ßadqu > qd,x o subsisted (WrxO&n]yi ‘they will keep’). As a matter of fact, the suffix -un is especially frequent in pause, and it stands to reason that it was influenced by pausal forms with -u ending. Outside pause, pretonic lengthening is attested with a only (ˆW‡la:v‘yi) and a too may be reduced even with (smaller) disjunctive accents: ˆW‡ar]yTI ‘you will fear’ Exod 9:30 with zaqef qa†an, no doubt in the wake of the parallel W‡ar]yyi. I have not found cases of the preservation of pretonic u or even i outside pause.

00-Blau.book Page 153 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

153

Stress ∑ 3.5.12.2.19.

3.5.12.2.18. With stage iv we have reconstructed stress as it is reflected in the biblical text. We have not yet dealt with the first stage of stress, which preceded the stage of general penultimate stress. Whereas the theory of general penultimate stress is firmly based on the attested biblical stress system in pause, the reconstruction of stage i is somewhat vague. It is based, in its entirety, on the assumption (which, to be sure, is quite well founded; see §3.5.9.2, p. 136) that only stressed a shifted to o. Stress stages ii, iii, iv, with which we have dealt, do not explain how the second syllable of ˆ/vl: ‘tongue’ and r/fyqI ‘smoke’ and the first syllable of rmE/v were stressed, as they must have been, since the words have o, which arose from stressed a#. Accordingly, we have to assume that, in the Pre-Hebrew of stage i, words containing long vowels were stressed on the long vowel nearest to the ultima. On such an assumption ˆ/vl:, r/fyqI, and rmE/v were stressed originally on a (*lasa#nu, *qita#ru, *sa#miru) and, therefore, that vowel shifted it to o. No other unequivocal details can be ascertained as to this first stage of stress. 3.5.12.2.18n. Two models for stage i have been suggested; for further discussion and references, see Blau (1979d: 49–51 = Topics, 120–22; 1975: 62–66 = Studies, 54–58). The usual one is the stress system accepted in the reading of Standard Literary Arabic (based on the prevailing stress pattern of the Syrian-Lebanese dialect group). In this model, words lacking long syllables (i.e., syllables containing long vowels or closed syllables) are stressed either (1) on the antepenult or (2) (according to another model) on the syllable preceding it or (3) (according to still another pattern) on the first syllable (*waßadáqatu/ *waßádaqatu/*wáßadaqatu). This hypothesis, however, is deficient for Pre-Hebrew. It was propounded at a time when Arabic was thought to reflect Proto-Semitic in some way. It has been demonstrated that this system in Eastern Arabic dialects is late, later than that of the Maghrebine (Western) Arabic dialects (Mayer Lambert 1897; Blau 1972b = Middle Arabic, 297–305). Therefore, it is tempting to posit a stress pattern more akin to that prevailing in Maghrebine (Western) Arabic dialects. In these dialects, a word with no long syllables is stressed on the ultima. This corresponds to the penult in Standard Literary Arabic (as also in Pre-Hebrew, in which, at this stage, final short vowels were preserved; the additional final syllable adds one in counting): *waßadaqátu. The assumption of this (quasi-)Maghrebine stress system has an additional advantage: it explains better the transition to general penultimate stress in stage ii. According to the Maghrebine stress model, even in stage i the stress was often paroxytone, not only when the penult was long (as it is also according to the quasi-Lebanese stress model), but also in words lacking long syllables; it was only in words containing long syllables preceding the penult that the stress was not paroxytone. From a stress system containing so many paroxytone words, it was only a small step to general penultimate stress.

3.5.12.2.19. Accordingly, we posit the following stages for the development of the BHeb stress system. Stage i: In words containing long vowels, the long vowel nearest the ultima was stressed. Stage ii: General penultimate stress. Stage iii: The stress did not move; final short vowels were omitted; alternations of oxytone and paroxytone words developed, and thus stress became phonemic. Stage iv: A tendency to oxytone stress prevailed; in two cases it developed to a veritable sound shift: the stress invariably moved from

00-Blau.book Page 154 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

3.5.13. ∑ Pause

154

an open short penult vowel to an open ultima, as well as from a closed penult to a closed ultima. Pretonic lengthening ceased, and newly emerging pretonic open syllables containing a short vowel were reduced.

3.5.13. Pausal Forms 3.5.13.1. Words in pausal position are those that precede a break in reading; they are marked by strong disjunctive cantillation marks, either at the end of the verse, indicated by the cantillation mark sof pasuq (lit., ‘the end of the verse’), or in the middle of the verse, in the main marked by the cantillation mark etna˙. In the preceding sections, we have discussed these forms, and, as we have seen, they are different from contextual forms. They often maintain a more archaic stress pattern and preserve syllables dropped in context. 3.5.13.2. That pausal forms reflect a linguistic stage more archaic than the contextual ones is easily demonstrated. The paroxytone pausal forms Wrm:&v… ‘they watched’; hr;m:&v… ‘she watched’; WrmO&v‘yi ‘they will watch’ correspond to the oxytone contextual forms W‡rm}v…; hr;&m}v…; W‡rm}v‘yi. As we have said before: from a diachronic point of view, we cannot speak of a retreat of the stress in pause. On the contrary, the original stress structure was preserved in pause and tended to change in contextual forms. Nevertheless, changes occur in pause as well. As can be seen in the forms cited, the stressed syllable of the pausal form is lengthened (§3.5.11.2, p. 139). As a matter of fact, it was this lengthening that preserved the original syllable structure; nevertheless, the lengthening itself is a change. Therefore, as a rule, we regard stressed syllables in pause as long, even when the vowel of the corresponding contextual form has to be considered short. Consider the pausal tyiB:& ‘house’; μ["P:& ‘beat, time’, where the qamaß indicates that the first syllable is (historically) long, in contrast to contextual tyiB"&; μ["P"&, which contain (historically) short pata˙ in the first syllable. Thus the first vowels of rp Ëyid'&y;).

4.2.3.3.5. The striking word structure of Úr]b:D] ‘your (m) speech’ and the more original stress pattern of pausal Úr,&b:D] has been dealt with above (see §3.5.7.5.7, p. 126). In Rabbinic Hebrew, the 2ms pronominal suffix has the form Ë-; after short vowels. Based on this fact and on transliterations of the form, P. Kahle assumed that Ë-; is the genuine Hebrew form, Ú-] the Masoretic restoration, in accordance with his theory that the Masoretes changed their tradition under the influence of Classical Arabic grammar (see §3.3.2.2.6, p. 80). Actually, even without taking the basic improbability of this theory into consideration, the structure of Úr]b:D] is not aberrant at all. Its pattern exactly matches the verbal patterns hr;m}v…, Wrm}v…, and as stated (see §3.5.7.5.7, p. 126), both have to be interpreted as emerging from the fourth stress stage, according to the special sound shifts obtaining at that period. Moreover, Kahle was wrong in his claim that Babylonian and Palestinian biblical texts attest the pronominal suffix Ë-;: in biblical texts proper, these vocalization systems use the same pattern Úr]b:D] as the Tiberians. It is only in post-biblical texts vocalized according to these systems that Ë-; occurs, and as a result, in quotations from the Bible as well, which may be pronounced as in Rabbinic Hebrew, according to their context. Nor should the Greek and Latin transcriptions be used as proof for the artificiality of the Úr]b:D] pattern. They simply reflect the “vulgar,” i.e., the later (Mishnaic), form of the 2ms pronominal suffix. And, indeed, even the consonantal text of the Bible, although rarely to be sure, attests Ú- by using final h as a vowel letter (hk:a“Bø ‘when you come to’ Gen 10:19, i.e., ‘in the direction of’); for details, see the masterful study by Ben Óayyim (1954). In addition, this spelling is frequent in the Dead Sea Scrolls, thus proving that Ú- precedes the supposed activity of the Masoretes, who allegedly were emulating the Arab grammarians. 4.2.3.3.5n. See the final rendering of Kahle’s view (1959: 171–79). Sievers (1901: 288–91) may be right in one detail. He claims that the rhythm of the poetic passages of the Bible demands that the 2ms pronominal suffix Ú- be unstressed in context as well. It is indeed possible that (a part of ) biblical poetry reflects a stress system preceding the fourth stress period, in which Ú- had become stressed. Though this is possible, our limited knowledge of biblical poetry does not enable us to state anything with certainty. At any rate, even if Sievers’s theory proves right, this by no means intimates that the vocalization of this pronominal suffix is artificial.

4.2.3.4. Third-Person Masculine-Singular Suffixes 4.2.3.4.1. The third-person masculine singular suffix derives from the same base as the independent personal pronoun aWh. Its original form, -hu, has

00-Blau.book Page 172 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

4.2.3.4.2. ∑ Independent -hu /-ha Personal Pronouns

172

been preserved after long vowels, as attested in WhyPI& (alongside wyPI) ‘his mouth’, WhyTI&r]m"v‘ (alongside wyTIr]m"v)‘ , WhWn‡r]m"v,‘ Whde&c… ‘his field’, Wha&:r; ‘he saw him’, WhaE&r]yi ‘he will see it’, and in analogy to III-y verbs such as Whre&m}v‘y.i Since the 3ms of the suffix-tense originally terminated in a (see §4.3.5.2.2.4, p. 221), which in pause became lengthened, Wh- was preserved in pause after long a (e.g., Whr;&m:v‘). But after short a the h was elided and the emerging diphthong aw was monophthongized to /-: *samarahu > *samaraw > /rm:v‘. It is this /- that serves as the usual pronominal suffix of the 3ms after singular nouns; from the three original forms -uhu (in the nominative), -ihu (in the genitive), and -ahu (> -aw > o; in the accusative), it was -ahu > -o that had the upper hand through the analogical influence of verbal forms of the thirdperson singular of the suffix-tense such as /rm:v‘ and prepositions that originally terminated in the adverbial accusative ending -a (/l ‘to him’, /M[I ‘with him’, etc., which influenced the emergence of /ryv¥ ‘his song’). The archaic spelling h-o (as hrøy[I ‘his foal’ Gen 49:11), which attests the original consonantal h (-ahu > o), still occurs in the biblical text. 4.2.3.4.1n. See above, §4.2.2.4, pp. 162–164, where the alternation of initial h and s in the comparable 3s pronominal forms is discussed.

4.2.3.4.2. After the dual/plural -ay ending of plural nouns (cf. §4.2.3.3.4, p. 170) the h was elided and -aw arose: *sirayhu > *sirayw > wyr;yv¥, pronounced sirOw. If the suffix is directly preceded by a consonant, the h is progressively assimilated to this consonant; this is the case when the h is preceded by the so-called nun energeticum (after the prefix-tense, the imperative, and some particles, such as WNr,&m}v‘yi < *yism´ræ!nhu; WN;n‡ ,yaE ‘he is not’ < *ªenæ!nhu), or by -at, the 3fs form of the suffix-tense (as WTB"&n;G } ‘she stole it’). 4.2.3.4.2n. After the prefix-tense, -e!hu is used in prose mainly after (historical) short forms (i.e., the jussive and forms opening with the “conversive” waw), as in Whq &nE iYew ' ‘and He made him to suck’ Deut 32:13. Otherwise, -œ!nnu prevails, as in WNa wyr;yv¥ ‘his songs’ (for which, see above, §4.2.3.4.2, p. 172), viz., *yadaya/*siraya. The restoration of the h was also influenced by the fact that it was felt to represent the third-person pronominal suffix. The segol instead of the expected ßere in the form h: r,&m}v‘yi is due to assimilation to the following qamaß, for which, see above, §3.5.10.3, p. 137. In the suffix-tense, however, it was the III-y verbs that were influenced by the strong verb. Ha:r; ‘he saw her’ was formed by analogy to Hr;m:v‘ ‘he kept her’, even though the former has long a before the pronominal suffix and the latter has original short a preceding the pronominal suffix.

4.2.3.5.2. After short vowels, however, the 3fs suffix has, as a rule, the form H-;‡, as in Hr;m:v,‘ Hl: ‘to her’, Hr;yv¥. If the suffix is directly preceded by a consonant, the h is progressively assimilated to this consonant, under the same conditions that apply to the h of the third-person masculine (see §4.2.3.4.2). The alternation of h: - (and rare H-;) with hN;-;‡ after the prefix-tense parallels that of the masculine Wh-e‡ with WN-,‡; see above, §4.2.3.4.2; §4.2.3.5.1n. 4.2.3.5.2n. For rare forms terminating in h-; (with h as a vowel letter, as hl: = la Num 32:42), which, it seems, are more original than the usual forms with consonantal h, see §3.3.5.3.4, p. 93. The a preceding the h arose partly by assimilation to the final a, or, more accurately, by the prevalence of the a accusative ending owing to this assimilation. But partly it was original, viz., in prepositions (which terminated in the adverbial accusative ending -a) and in the 3ms form of the suffix-tense. The reason for the preservation of the final vowel after long vowels was that the pronominal suffix was not sufficiently indicated without the final qamaß, because of the elision of the short a after the long vowel. After short vowels, however, it was adequately marked by -a(h).

4.2.3.6. First-Person Plural Suffixes 4.2.3.6.1. The first-person plural suffix -nu corresponds to the ending of the 1cp independent pronoun Wnj}n'‡a“. In Aramaic and Gºez, both the pronominal suffix and the independent personal pronoun terminate in a/a. In Classical Arabic, however, the independent personal pronoun has final -u but the pronominal suffix has -a. As stated above (see §4.2.2.2.2, p. 160), according to the principle of archaic heterogeneity, variety is, as a rule, more archaic than uniformity, which is apt to arise by analogy. So, in contradistinction to Hebrew, -na has to be posited as the original Proto-Semitic form. In Hebrew, *-na shifted to Wn- by analogy with Wnj}n‡'a“. In Aramaic and Gºez, the pronominal suffix analogically influenced the independent personal pronoun. This conforms to our general finding that in the first and second persons the pronominal suffixes differ from the independent personal pronouns. 4.2.3.6.1n. In Akkadian, the independent pronoun terminates in -u, the pronominal suffix in -i. In the Akkadian of Mari the pronominal suffix terminates in -e, and this may also be the case in Ugaritic; see Tropper (2000: 224).

00-Blau.book Page 174 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

4.2.3.7. ∑ Independent -kumu /-kina Personal Pronouns

174

4.2.3.7. Second-Person Plural Suffixes 4.2.3.7.1. The Proto-Semitic forms of the second-person plural suffixes are *-kumu/*-kina, *-kinna (cf. the independent personal pronouns *ªantumu/ *ªantina, *ªantinna, §4.2.2.7, pp. 166–168). 4.2.3.7.1n. For the possibility that the original forms were -kumu/-tina, -tinna, see §4.2.2.3.3n, p. 162; this proposal, however, is based on the assumption of a far-reaching identity of independent personal pronouns and pronominal suffixes. -kinna reflects the addition of the feminine plural ending -na to -kin, whereas -kina reflects the addition of the feminine plural suffix -a (cf. §4.2.2.7.3 and note, p. 166). -kina survived only in hn;k bTø&k}y i that influenced *kútub to become *kutúb > btøK}. The same happened also in other verbal themes.

4.3.5.2.5. The Participles 4.3.5.2.5.1. The participle of action verbs in the paºal pattern is poºel, historically *paºil; the participle of the stative patterns is an adjective, as a rule identical to the 3ms of the suffix-tense: suffix-tense ˆqEz;, rgOy;, participle ˆqEz,: r/gy;. There is, however, a difference in the length of the last syllable (in the preTiberian period): in the suffix-tense it is short (as demonstrated by the pata˙ in the parallel action verb suffix-tense bt"K): ; in the participle, it is long, as it is in every noun in the absolute (see §3.5.7.1.2, p. 119). Therefore, the transcription of the forms according to the pre-Tiberian system, which differentiates long and short vowels, is: suffix-tense zaqen, yagor, participle zaqen, yagor. However, these participles are basically identical to the suffix-tense, which actually must be considered originally to have been a conjugated adjective; cf. the qal participles μq: ‘rising’, lq" ‘light’, identical to the suffix-tense in verbs II-w/y and geminate verbs. However, in strong verbs these stative adjectival participles were being superseded by the l[E/P of action verbs ( just as the stative suffix-tense was being replaced by paºal). In some cases paºel and poºel coexist: j'kEv/… j'kE/v ‘forgetting’, π[Ez; / π[E/z ‘vexed’ (in all likelihood paºel was the original form). In other cases poºel alone serves as a veritable participle, paºel being clearly relegated to nominal function: ˆkE/v ‘inhabiting’ in contrast to ˆkEv… ‘inhabitant’. Sometimes, however, paºel has totally disappeared: from anec… ‘he hated’, only the participle anecø survived. 4.3.5.2.5.1n. However, cf. cases such as Wxm}a: ‘they were strong’, participle/adjective ≈yMIa"; qz''j: (reflecting the shift of paºel to paºal; even in pause qz;j:, rather than *˙azeq) ‘he was strong’, participle/adjective qz;j:. The stative pattern of the participle is identical to the 3ms of the suffix-tense, if one does not take into consideration the original -a ending of the suffix-tense in contrast to the case endings of the participle. Moreover, the participle has a (pre-Tiberian) long vowel in its last syllable in contrast with a short vowel in the suffix-tense. Note that the participle/adjective r/gy; exhibits plene writing, in contrast to the defective spelling of the suffix-tense lkøy;. This is only a hint, since full and defective spellings alternate. And, indeed, the suffix-tense l/ky; is attested three times. There is a certain tendency to adapt the ßere and the ˙olam in the nouns ˆqEz; and rgOy;, as also in other cases, to originally long ßere and ˙olam (i.e., those that have arisen by monophthongization and, in the case of ˙olam, also by the Canaanite shift a! to o). In other words, there is a tendency to preserve the vowels even when the stress is remote: thus, contrast the mp construct form ynev´y] with yneq}zi. Such alternations occur even in the same noun: ≈pEj: ‘delighting’ has both μh l[øP} (which has to be analyzed as containing long o in the pre-Tiberian period, arising by secondary lengthening from original short o < u, as is the rule in absolute nouns). l[øP} is formed even from verbs with characteristic a in the prefix-tense: [m"v‘yi ‘he will hear’, ['møv(‘ lI). It appears that originally the prefix-tense and the construct infinitive had the same characteristic vowel; with the restriction of the yaf ºil prefix-tense, the corresponding i-infinitive fell into desuetude as well. In IIIlaryngeal/pharyngeal verbs, the o of the prefix-tense and the imperative, being short, was assimilated to the laryngeal/pharyngeal to become a. In contrast, the long o of the infinitive was preserved (jT"p}y,' jt"P:} ‘he will open, open!’ in contrast to j'Tøp}l;I see §4.3.7.3.5, p. 240), thus giving rise to the struc-

00-Blau.book Page 227 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

227

Absolute Infinitive; Qal Infinitives; Verbal Themes Nif ºal ∑ 4.3.5.3.1.

ture of a in the prefix-tense and the imperative in contrast to o in the construct infinitive. This pattern (a in the prefix-tense : o in the construct infinitive) spread to verbs that had original a in the prefix-tense, such as bK"r]yi ‘he will ride’ in contrast to the infinitive bKør]l,I rather than *lirkab2 . The vowel a in the infinitive has only been preserved in bK"v‘lI ‘to lie’ (alongside ÚB}k}v…B)} , lp"v‘BI ‘when being low’. 4.3.5.2.6.1n. The i-infinitive was preserved mainly in weak verbs: ttEl: ‘to give’, taxEl: ‘to go out’, ryv¥l: ‘to sing’. Strong i-infinitive verbs have also been preserved according to J. Barth (1889: 184), e.g., rc´[}l" ‘to tithe’ Deut 26:12. It is remarkable that these a-infinitives have pata˙ rather than qamaß, in spite of its reconstruction above as a long vowel! It appears that the pata˙ does not reflect the archaic ainfinitive but instead exhibits the influence of Rabbinic Hebrew on the Masoretes. In Rabbinic Hebrew, the trend of development has been reversed and infinitives (following l; as always in Rabbinic Hebrew) with a as the characteristic vowel spread in the wake of prefix-tenses with a (see Berggrün 1995: 100–107). In Rabbinic Hebrew, the construct infinitive was felt to be derived from the prefix-tense and was restructured according to it (as in jQ"lI ‘to take’, in the wake of the prefix-tense jQ' y,i in contrast to biblical tj"q&l" :).

4.3.5.2.6.2. In Biblical Hebrew, some feminine forms of the construct infinitive also occur, as μyiM"&h" tv≤ bø&y] Ad[" ‘until the waters were dried up’ Gen 8:7; Ht:n;q}zi yrej“a" ‘after becoming old’ Gen 24:36; Ht:aø /tb:h“a"B} ‘because he loved her’ Gen 29:20; ytIaø ha:r]yil} ‘to fear me’ Deut 4:10; tk yLIg'T,} *tugalliyu > WLg'T;} *tugallayi > yLIguT,} *tugallayu > WLguT.} If the vowel following the y was (an originally short) a, qamaß was the result of the elision (see above, §3.4.4.4, p. 98): *galaya > hl:G,; *raßiya > hx:r.; The same process occurred in

00-Blau.book Page 250 Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:29 AM

4.3.8.6.4.2. ∑ III-y Absolute Verbs Infinitive; Verbal Themes

250

all the 3ms forms of the suffix-tense. The 3fs form *hoglayat > tl:g]h: ‘she was taken into exile’ Jer 13:19 reflects the archaic form of the feminine ending, still preserving its t (which, it seems, was elided only after short a but preserved after long a). As these examples demonstrate, the a, arising from the elision of the y (and w) has not shifted to o, perhaps because the elision of the y is later than the Canaanite shift â to o, or (also) owing to paradigmatic pressure, the suffix-tense often being characterized by a, rather than o. On the other hand, o does occur in the construct infinitive, which, as a rule, terminates in -ot: t/lG] ‚ t/lg] h". The t of -ot is, no doubt, the feminine ending, which was preserved in these infinitive forms because of their relative shortness (as in I-n and I-y verbs; see §4.3.8.3.3, pp. 241–242; §4.3.8.4.13, pp. 246–247). The o, however, is either due to the Canaanite shift, if it still operated, and/or to the analogy of the construct infinitive forms of the sound verb in qal, which contained o (rmøv‘). If indeed it was due (only) to analogy, the development first took place in the qal and spread afterward to the other verbal themes. 4.3.8.6.4.1n. For the preservation of the t-ending after long a, see §4.3.3.4.8n, p. 211. For further details, see Blau 1980 = Topics, 126–37. Cf. also tyh ‘she was’ in the Siloam inscription.

4.3.8.6.4.2. As mentioned, the original ending of the 3fs of the suffix-tense was -at. The usual ending however, is ht:-]: ht:l}G;, ht:L}Gi, ht:l}g]h:, etc. These forms are due to the analogical adaptation of the structurally exceptional forms galat, gillat, hogölat to the structure of the strong verb hr;m}v…, hd;B}KI, hd;B}k}h:. 4.3.8.6.5. When the y occurred between two short vowels, the second of which was not a (i.e., ayu, ayi, awu, awi, iyu, iyi, iwu, iwi, uyu, uyi, uwu, uwi), the result of the elision of the y/w was segol. This is characteristic of the prefix-tense (hl BHeb bsøy); . As a matter of fact, yastatiru ‘he will hide’, in a rather parallel way, dialectically developed into yasattiru, thus attesting the possibility that *yasubbu stemmed from *yasbubu. See Blau 1969b: 39 = Middle Arabic, 362.

4.3.8.8.3. As for the formation of piººel, puººal, and hitpaººel, see above, §4.3.8.7.5, pp. 256ff. 4.3.8.8.4. In the qal, action and stative verbs are clearly differentiated: On the one hand, stative verbs, having a in all their forms, are merely conjugated adjectives (cf. above, 4.3.8.8.1, p. 258) and are not formed in accordance with the structure of the strong verbs (no forms such as *qal´lu, *qolel are attested). Action verbs, on the other hand, that exhibit u (o) in the prefixtense (bsøy); do have forms identical to those of the strong verb (hb:b}s:, Wbb}s:, bbE/s). In the light of the qal forms ytI/N‡G " and ˆ/nG:, ˆge y ; ‘he defends’ must be interpreted historically as the i(e)-prefix-tense of the qal, which was synchronically understood as hif ºil (and, in Rabbinic Hebrew, gave rise to the genuine hif ºil forms ˆgehE, ˆgemE). Thus, the prefix-tense of the qal conforms to Barth’s Law: yif ºal (lq' y)e as against yaf ºul / yaf ºil (bsøy;, ˆgey); (see above, §4.3.5.2.3.1, p. 221). 4.3.8.8.5. As stated, it is the second radical that is generally doubled (in the qal, nif ºal, hif ºil, and hof ºal; for the different formation of the piººel, puººal, and hitpaººel, see §4.3.8.7.4.2, p. 256). The doubling does not take place in word-final position (such as bsøy;, bsEhE, etc.), which does not permit doubling (see above, §3.5.11.3, p. 139), or in word-internal position when the second radical is vowelless: hn;b}sE&T:. It is difficult to interpret this detail historically. It may be secondary, due to the effect of II-w/y verbs (hn;m}q&T E :), or a result of the intention to avoid a deviant form (*tasebb´na does not conform to any pattern). However, it may be original, reflecting an archaic biradical formation. 4.3.8.8.6. As in II-w/y verbs (see §4.3.8.7.4.2, p. 256), the vocalic suffixes of the finite verb forms are unstressed, because the penultimate syllable, being closed by the doubling of the second radical, preserved the original penultimate stress. The same process occurred in II-w/y verbs with a long penultimate syllable: hL:q'& (in contrast to the participle hL:&q"), WLq"&, WLq"&T,E yBIsø&T:, hB:s"&n; (in contrast to the participle hB:&s"n], the vowel of the n being reduced because of its distance from the stress), hB:s&h E E (in contrast to the participle hB:&sIm}, the vowel of the m being reduced because of its distance from the stress), hB:s"&Wh (in contrast to the participle hB:&s"Wm). 4.3.8.8.6n. For the “connective” vowel o in the suffix-tense first and second persons (preceding a consonantal suffix), as in ytI/B&s", ytI/B&s"n], ytI/B&sIh“, ytI/B&s"Wh, and the (optional) œö connective vowel in the 2fp and 3fp of the prefix-tense (as hn;yB