quiescent, is made audible again by the helping Seghôl (unless perhaps there is a confusion with the imperfect consecutive Hiphʿîl of יאל).
[e] (d) Verbs פ״י and ל״א (cf. § 69, § 70, and § 74), as יָצָא to go forth, imperative צֵא go forth, with ־ָה paragogic צֵ֫אָה Ju 9 in principal pause for צְאָה; 2nd fem. plur. צְאֶ֫נָה Ct 3; infinitive צֵאת; Hiphʿîl הוֹצִיא to bring forth.—יָרֵא to fear, imperfect יִירָא and וַיִּירָא (or וַיּרָא), imperative יְרָא; imperfect Niphʿal יִוָּרֵא ψ 130, participle נוֹרָא.
[f] (e) Verbs פ״י and ל״ה (cf. § 69, § 70, and § 75), e.g. יָדָה to throw, Hiphʿîl to confess, to praise, and יָרָה to throw (both properly verbs פ״ו), and יָפָה to be beautiful. Infinitive יָרֹה, יְרוֹת; imperative יְרֵה; imperfect consecutive וַיִּיף Ez 31 (cf. also וַתִּ֫יפִי 16); with suffixes וַנִּירָם we have shot at them (from יָרָה) Nu 21; perhaps, however, it should be read with the LXX וְנִינָם and their race (also in the very corrupt passage ψ 74 נִינָם is probably a substantive, and not the imperfect Qal with suffix from יָנָה); Piʿēl; וַיַּדּוּ for וַיְיַדּוּ, (§ 69 u). Hiphʿîl הוֹדָה, הוֹרָה; infinitive הוֹדֹת (as infinitive absolute 2 Ch 7); imperfect יוֹרֶה, cf. אַל־תֹּנוּ Jer 22; apocopated וַיּוֹר 2 K 13.
[g] (f) Verbs ע״וּ and ל״א, particularly בּוֹא to come. Perfect בָּא, בָּ֫אתָ, בָּ֫את or בָּאתְ (Gn 16, 2 S 14, Mi 4; cf. § 75 m), once בָּ֫נוּ for בָּ֫אנוּ 1 S 25; for בֹּאוּ Jer 27, which is apparently the perfect, read יָבֹ֫אוּ. In the imperfect Qal the separating vowel occurs (תְּבֹאָ֫ינָה instead of the more common תָּבֹ֫אנָה, cf. also תָּבֹ֫אןָ Gn 30) only in Jer 9, ψ 45, and 1 S 10 Kethîbh.
[h] For וַתָּבֹאת 1 S 25 Qerê (the Kethîbh ותבאתי evidently combines the two readings וּבָאתְ and וַתָּבֹאִי; cf. Nestle, ZAW. xiv. 319), read וַתָּבֹ֫אִי; on the impossible forms Dt 33 and Jb 22 cf. § 48 d.—In the perfect Hiphʿîl הֵבִיא, הֵבֵ֫אתָ and (only before a suffix) הֲבִיאֹתָ; the latter form is also certainly intended in Nu 14, where the Masora requires וְהֵֽבֵיאתִ֫י, cf. 2 K 9, 19, Is 43) Jer 25, Ct 3. Before suffixes the ē of the first syllable in the 3rd sing. always becomes Ḥaṭeph-Seghôl, e.g. הֱבִֽיאֲךָ, הֱבִיאַ֫נִי; elsewhere invariably Ḥaṭeph-Pathaḥ, e.g. הֲבֵאתָ֫נוּ or הֲבִֽיאֹתָ֫נוּ. On the other hand, ē is retained in the secondary tone in the perfect consecutive when without suffixes, e.g. וְהֵֽבֵאתָ֫. Cf. moreover, וַֽהֲקֵאֹתוֹ (וַֽהֲקֵאֹתוֹ in Opitius and Hahn is altogether incorrect), Pr 25, from קִיא; but קְיוּ spue ye, Jer 25 (perhaps only a mistake for קִיאוּ), is not to be referred to קִיא but to a secondary stem קָיָה. In the imperfect וַתָּקִא is found once, Lv 18, besides וַיָּקֵא (analogous to וַיָּבֵא).—On אָבִי (for אָבִיא), מֵבִי, יָנִי, see § 74 k.
[i] (g) The form חָיַי to live, in the perfect Qal, besides the ordinary development to חָיָה (fem. חָֽיְתָה), is also treated as a verb ע״ע, and then becomes חַי in the 3rd pers. perfect, in pause חָי, and with wāw consecutive וָחַי Gn 3, and frequently. In Lv 25 the contracted form וְחֵי is perhaps st. constr. of חַי life, but in any case read וָחַי perfect consecutive as in verse 35. The form וָחָ֫יָה occurs in Ex 1 in pause for וָחַ֫יָּה (3rd fem.) with Dageš omitted in the י on account of the pausal lengthening of ă to ā.
