39 Ground-form and Derived Stems

§ 39. Ground-form and Derived Stems.

Brockelmann, Sem. Sprachwiss., p. 119 ff.; Grundriss, p. 504 ff.

a

1. The 3^rd sing. masc. of the Perfect in the form of the pure stem (i. e. in Qal, see g) is generally regarded, lexicographically and grammatically, as the ground-form of the verb (§ 30 a), e. g. lj;q' he has killed, dbeK' he was heavy, !joq' he was little.¹ From this form the other persons of the Perfect are derived, and the Participle also is connected with it. ljoq. or lj;q., like the Imperative and Infinitive construct in sound, may also be regarded as an alternative ground-form, with which the Imperfect (see § 47) is connected.

b
In verbs W¾¾[ (i. e. with w for their second radical) the stem-form, given both in Lexicon and Grammar, is not the 3^rd sing. masc. Perfect (consisting of two consonants), but the form with medial w, which appears in the Imperative and Infinitive; e. g. bWv to return (3^rd pers. perf. bv'): the same is the case in most stems with medial y, e. g. !yDI to judge.

c
2. From the pure stem, or Qal, the derivative stems are formed according to an unvarying analogy, in which the idea of the stem assumes the most varied shades of meaning, according to the changes in its form (intensive, frequentative, privative, causative, reflexive, reciprocal; some of them with corresponding passive forms), e. g. dm;l' to learn, dM;li to teach; bk;v' to lie, byKiv.hi to lay; jp;v' to judge, jP;v.nI to contend. In other languages such formations are regarded as new or derivative verbs, e. g. Germ. fallen (to fall), fällen (to fell); trinken (to drink), tränken (to drench); Lat. lactere (to suck, Germ. saugen), lactare (to suckle, Germ. säugen); iaceçre (to throw), iaceÒre (to lie down); gi,nomai( genna,w. In Hebrew, however, these formations are incomparably more regular and systematic than (e. g.) in Greek, Latin, or English; and, since the time of Reuchlin, they have usually been called conjugations of the primitive form (among the Jewish grammarians ~ynIy"n>Bi, i. e. formations, or more correctly species), and are always treated together in the grammar and lexicon.²

d

3. The changes in the primitive form consist either in internal modification by means of vowel-change and strengthening of the middle consonant (lJeqiÃ lJ;quÈ ljeAqÃ lj;Aq; cf. to lie, to lay; to fall, to fell), or in the repetition of one or two of the stem-consonants (ll;j.qiÃ lj;l.j;q.), or finally in the introduction of formative additions (lj;q.nI), which may also be accompanied by internal change (lyjiq.hiÃ lJeq;t.hi). Cf. § 31 b.

In Aramaic the formation of the conjugations is effected more by formative additions than by vowel-change. The vocalic distinctions have mostly become obsolete, so that, e. g. the reflexives with the prefix t.hiÃ t.aiÃ t.a, have entirely usurped the place of the passives. On the other hand, Arabic has preserved great wealth in both methods of formation, while Hebrew in this, as in other respects, holds the middle place (§ 1 m).

e

4. Grammarians differ as to the number and arrangement of these conjugations. The common practice, however, of calling them by the old grammatical terms, prevents any misunderstanding. The simple form is called Qal (lq; light, because it has no formative additions); the others (~ydIbeK. heavy, being weighted, as it were, with the strengthening of consonants or with formative additions) take their names from the paradigm of l[;P' he has done,³ which was used in the earliest Jewish grammatical works. Several of these have passives which are distinguished from their actives by more obscure vowels. The common conjugations (including Qal and the passives) are the seven following, but very few verbs exhibit them all:

f

	Active	Passive
1. Qal	lj;q' to kill.	(Cf. § 52 e.)
2. NiphÇal	lj;q.nI to kill oneself (rarely passive).
3. PiÇeÒl	lJeqi to kill many, to massacre.	4. PuÇal lJ;qu.
5. HiphÇiÖl	lyjiq.hi to cause to kill.	6. HophÇal lj;Q.h'.
7. HithpaÇeÒl	lJeq;t.hi to kill oneself.	[Very rare, HothpaÇal lJ;q;t.h'.]

g

There are besides several less frequent conjugations, some of which, however, are more common in the kindred languages, and even in Hebrew (in the weak verb) regularly take the place of the usual conjugations (§ 55).

In Arabic there is a greater variety of conjugations, and their arrangement is more appropriate. According to the Arabic method, the Hebrew conjugations would stand thus: 1. Qal; 2. piÇeÒl and PuÇal; 3. PoÖÇeÒl and PoÖÇal (see § 55 b); 4. HiphÇiÖl and HophÇal; 5. Hithpa ÇeÒl and HothpaÇal; 6. HithpoÖÇeÒl (see § 55 b); 7. NiphÇal; 8. HithpaÇeÒl (see § 54 l); 9. PiÇleÒl(see § 55 d), A more satisfactory division would be into three classes: (1) The intensive PiÇleÒl with the derived and analogous forms PuÇal and HithpaÇeÒl. (2) The causative HiphÇiÖl with its passive HophÇal, and the analogous forms (SëaphÇeÒl and TiphÇeÒl), (3) The reflexive or passive NiphÇal.

Footnotes:

¹[2] For the sake of brevity, however, the meaning in Hebrew-English Lexicons is usually given in the Infinitive, e. g. dm;l' to learn, properly he has learnt.

²[1] The term Conjugation thus has an entirely different meaning in Hebrew and Greek or Latin grammar.

³[1] This paradigm was borrowed from the Arabic grammarians, and, according to Bacher, probably first adopted throughout by AbulwaliÖd. It was, however, unsuitable on account of the guttural, and was, therefore, usually exchanged in later times for dq;P', after the example of Moses QimhÌi. This verb has the advantage, that all its conjugations are actually found in the Old Testament. On the other hand, it has the disadvantage of indistinctness in the pronunciation of some of its forms, e. g. T'd>q;P'Ã ~T, d>q;P..The paradigm of lj;q' commonly used since the time of Danz, avoids this defect, and is especially adapted for the comparative treatment of the Semitic dialects, inasmuch as it is found with slight change (Arab. and Ethiop. ltq) in all of them, It is true that in Hebrew it occurs only three times in Qal, and even then only in poetic style (y Ps 139:19, Jb 13:15, 24:14); yet it is worth retaining as a model which has been sanctioned by usage. More serious is the defect, that a number of forms of the paradigm of ljq leave the beginner in doubt as to whether or not there should be a Dagesë in the B^egadk^ephath letters, and consequently as to the correct division of the syllables.