the perfect of the active (Piʿ̄l). The Pathaḥ of the first syllable is, however, with one exception (see m), always attenuated to ĭ in the perfect. In the second syllable, ă has been retained in the majority of cases, so that the conjugation should more correctly be called Piʿal; but very frequently[1] this ă also is attenuated to ĭ, which is then regularly lengthened to ē, under the influence of the tone. Cf. in Aram. קַטֵּל; but in Biblical Aramaic almost always קַטִּל. On the three cases in which ă before a final ר or ס has passed into Seghôl, see below, l.—Hence, for the 3rd sing. masc. perfect, there arise forms like אִבַּד, לִמַּד, קִדַּשׁ; גִּדֵּף, כִּבֵּד, &c.—Before afformatives beginning with a consonant, however, ă is always retained, thus קִטַּ֫לְתָּ, קִטַּלְתֶּם, קִטַּ֫לְנוּ, &c. In the infinitives (absol. קַטֹּל, obscured from qaṭṭâl; constr. קַטֵּל), imperfect (יְקַטֵּל), imperative (קַטֵּל), and participle (מְקַטֵּל) the original ă of the first syllable reappears throughout. The vocal Šewâ of the preformatives is weakened from a short vowel; cf. the Arabic imperfect yŭqăttĭl, participle mŭqăttĭl.
[b] The passive (Puʿal) is distinguished by the obscure vowel ŭ, or very rarely ŏ, in the first syllable, and ŏ (in pause ā) always in the second. In Arabic, also, the passives are formed throughout with ŭ in the first syllable. The inflexion of both these conjugations is analogous to that of Qal.
[c] Rem. 1. The preformative מְ, which in the remaining conjugations also is the prefix of the participle, is probably connected with the interrogative or indefinite (cf. § 37) pronoun מִי quis? quicunque (fem. i.e. neuter, מָה); cf. § 85 e.
[d] 2. The Dageš forte, which according to the above is characteristic of the whole of Piʿēl and Puʿal, is often omitted (independently of verbs middle guttural, § 64 d) when the middle radical has Šewâ under it (cf. § 20 m), e.g. שִׁלְחָה for שִׁלְּחָה Ez 17; בִּקְשֻׁ֫הוּ 2 Ch 15 (but in the imperative always בַּקְּשׁוּ 1 S 28, &c.), and so always in הַלְלוּ praise. The vocal character of the Šewâ under the litera dagessanda is sometimes in such cases (according to § 10 h) expressly emphasized by its taking the form of a Ḥaṭeph, as in לֻֽקֳחָה Gn 2, with ־ֳ owing to the influence of the preceding u, cf. פָּֽעֳלוֹ for פָּעְלוֹ, &c.; Gn 9, Ju 16. In the imperfect and participle the Šewâ under the preformatives (Ḥaṭeph-Pathaḥ under א in the 1st sing. imperfect) serves at the same time as a characteristic of both conjugations (Gn 26 f.).
[e] 3. According to the convincing suggestion of Böttcher[2] (Ausführliches Lehrbuch, § 904 ff. and § 1022), many supposed perfects of Puʿal are in reality
- ↑ So in all verbs which end in Nûn, and in almost all which end in Lamed (Olsh. p. 538). Barth is probably right in supposing (ZDMG. 1894, p. 1 ff.) that the vowels of the strengthened perfects have been influenced by the imperfect.
- ↑ As Mayer Lambert observes, the same view was already expressed by Ibn Ǵanâḥ (see above, § 3 d) in the Kitāb el-lumaʿ, p. 161. Cf. especially Barth, ‘Das passive Qal und seine Participien,’ in the Festschrift zum Jubiläum Hildesheimer (Berlin, 1890), p. 145 ff.
