used to be treated as having a double set of forms, a regular series, and others like Hiphʿîl without the preformative, e.g. בִּין Dn 10; בִּינֹ֫תִי Dn 9, also בַּ֫נְתָּ ψ 139; רִיב֫וֹתָ thou strivest, Jb 33, also רַ֫בְתָּ La 3. The above perfects (בִּין, רִיב, &c.) might no doubt be taken as forms middle ē (properly ĭ), the ĭ of which has been lengthened to î (like the ŭ lengthened to ŭ in the imperfect Qal of קוּם). It is more probable, however, that they are really shortened forms of Hiphʿîl. This is supported by the fact that, especially in the case of בִּין, the shortened forms are few and probably all late, while the corresponding unshortened forms with the same meaning are very numerous, e.g. perfect הֵבִין (but בִּין only in Dn 10), הֲבִֽינוֹתֶם, infinitive הָבִין (but infin. abs. בִּין only in Pr 23), imperative הָבֵן (only in Dn 9 וּבִין immediately before וְהָבֵן, also בִּ֫ינוּ three times, and בִּ֫ינָה ψ 5), participle מֵבִין.[1] Elsewhere Hiphʿîl-forms are in use along with actual Qal-forms with the same meaning, thus: מֵרִיב (also רָב), מֵשִׂים placing (but only in Jb 4, which, with the critically untenable הָשִׂ֫ימִי Ez 21, is the only instance of שׂוּם in Hiphʿîl), מֵגִיחַ breaking forth Ju 20, with infin. Qal גִּיתוֹ; הַחִ֫ישׁוּ they rushed forth Ju 20, with תָשׁ, חַ֫שְׁתּי; מֵצִיץ glancing, also in perfect צָץ; הֵקִיא he spat out, with imperat. Qal קְיוּ. As passives we find a few apparent imperfects Hophʿal, which are really (according to § 53 u) imperfects passive of Qal, e.g. יוּחַל Is 66 from חִיל to turn round, יוּשָׁר from שִׁיר to sing, יוּשַׁת from שִׁית to set.
[b] 2. The above-mentioned Hiphʿîl-forms might equally well be derived from verbs ע״וּ; and the influence of the analogy of verbs ע״וּ is distinctly seen in the Niphʿal נָבוֹן (ground-form nabān), Pôlēl בּוֹנֵן, and Hithpôlēl הִתְבּוֹנֵן. The very close relation existing between verbs ע״י and ע״וּ is evident also from the fact that from some stems both forms occur side by side in Qal, thus from תִיל to turn round, imperative also ח֫וּלִי Mi 4; שִׂים to place, infinitive construct commonly שׂוּם (2 S 14 שׂים Qere), imperfect יָשִׂים, but Ex 4 יָשׂוּם. In other verbs one form is, at any rate, the more common, e.g. גִּיל to exult (גּוּל only Pr 23 Kethîbh); from לוּן (perhaps denominative from לַ֫יִל) to spend the night, לָלוּן occurs six times as infinitive construct, לָלִין only in Gn 24; but the imperative is always לִין, &c.—Of verbs ע״י the most common are שִׁית to set, רִיב to strive, דִּין to judge, שִׂישׂ to rejoice; cf. also perfect בָּל (middle
- ↑ Since בנת ψ 139 might be intended for בִּנֹ֫תָ, there remains really no form of בין which must necessarily be explained as a Qal, except the ptcp. plur. בָּנִים Jer 49. Nevertheless it is highly probable that all the above instances of Hiphʿîl-forms, parallel with Qal-forms of the same meaning, are merely due to a secondary formation from the imperfects Qal יָבִין, יָשִׂים, &c., which were wrongly regarded as imperfects Hiphʿîl: so Barth, ZDMG. xliii. p. 190 f., and Nominalbildung, p. 119 f.
