Jump to content

Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/221

From Wikisource
This page needs to be proofread.

secutive, Dt 4, 30, as well as before the afformatives תֶם and תֶן or before suffixes, Dt 22, 1 S 6, 1 K 8, Ez 34. For in all these cases the tone is removed from the וֹ to the following syllable, and this forward movement of the tone produces at the same time a weakening of the î to ē; thus הֵקִים, הֲקִימ֫וֹתָ (or הֱק׳; on הַֽעֵדֹ֫תָה Ex 19, cf. x), but וַֽהֲקֵֽמֹתָ, &c., Ex 26, &c.; Dt 4, Nu 18 (cf., however, וַֽהֲקֵמֹנ֫וּ Mi 5). In the same way in the 1st pers. sing. of the perfect Niphʿal, the ô before the separating vowel is always modified to û (נְקוּמ֫וֹתִ׳); cf. v. In the imperfect Qal and Hiphʿîl the separating vowel ־ֶי always bears the tone (תְּקוּמֶ֫ינָה).

 [k Without the separating vowel and consequently with the tone-long ō and ē instead of û and î we find in imperfect Qal תָּבֹ֫אנָה (see § 76 g); תָּשֹׁ֫בְןָ Ez 16 (also תְּשׁוּבֶ֫ינָה in the same verse); וַתָּשֹׁ֫בְנָה 1 S 7 (cf. Ez 35 Qe; on the Kethîbh תֵּישַׁ֫בְנָה cf. above, note on § 69 b); וַתָּאֹ֫רְנָה 1 S 14, from אוֹר (Kethîbh וַתִּרְאֶ֫נָה and they saw, see § 75 w); in Hiphʿîl, e.g. הֵנַ֫פְתָּ Ex 20, also הֲנִיפ֫וֹתִי Jb 31; וְהֵֽטַלְתִּי Jer 22; תָּשֵׁ֫בְנָה Jb 20; with a separating vowel, e.g. תְּבִיאֶ֫ינָה Lv. 7 from בּוֹא. Seghôl without י occurs in the imperfect Qal in תְּמוּתֶ֫נָה Ez 13, Zc 1; and in Hiphʿîl Mi 2: the Dageš in the Nûn is, with Baer, to be rejected in all three cases according to the best authorities. Wholly abnormal is תָּקִ֫ימְנָה Jer 44, probably an erroneous transposition of ימ‍ (for תְּקִמֶ֫ינָה), unless it originates from an incorrect spelling תָּקֵ֫ימְנָה or תְּקִימֶ֫נָה.

 [l 6. The tone, as in verbs ע״ע (cf. § 67 k), is also generally retained on the stem-syllable in verbs ע״וּ before the afformatives ־ָה, וּ, ־ִי; thus קָ֫מָה (but also בָּזָ֫ה לְךָ 2 K 19, probably for the sake of rhythmical uniformity with the following לָֽעֲגָה לְךָ; after wāw consecutive וְשָׁבָ֫ה Is 23); קָ֫מוּ (but also קָמ֫וּ, cf. Is 28, 29, Na 3, ψ 76, Pr 5, La 4; וְרָצ֫וּ 1 S 8; so especially before a following א, cf. § 49 l, Nu 13; וְנָע֫וּ Is 19; before ע, ψ 131, Pr 30, La 4); תָּק֫וּמִי, יָק֫וּמוּ, but before a suffix or with Nûn paragogic וַיְסֻכ֫וּם 2 Ch 28; יְקוּמ֫וּן Dt 33, &c.

 [m 7. The formation of the conjugations Piʿēl, Puʿal, and Hithpaʿēl is, strictly speaking, excluded by the nature of verbs ע״וּ. It is only in the latest books that we begin to find a few secondary formations, probably borrowed from Aramaic, on the analogy of verbs ע״ו (with consonantal ו, see below, gg); e.g. the Piʿēl עִוֵּד to surround, only in עִוְּדֻ֫נִי ψ 119; and with change of ו to י, קִיַּם Est 9, קִיְּמוּ Est 9, impf. וָאֲֽקַיֵ֫מָה ψ 119, infin. קַיֵּם Ez 13, Ru 4 &c., Est 9 &c., imperat. קַיְּמֵ֫נִי ψ 119; וְחִיַּכְתֶּם Dn 1 from חוּב to be guilty. The Hithpaʿēl הִצְטַיֵּד Jos 9, which belongs to the older language, is probably a denominative from צַ֫יִד. On the other hand the otherwise less common conjugation Pôlēl (see § 55 c), with its passive and reflexive, is usually