{"id":1280,"date":"2020-08-05T05:40:24","date_gmt":"2020-08-05T02:40:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/?p=1280"},"modified":"2020-08-06T02:47:43","modified_gmt":"2020-08-05T23:47:43","slug":"doubly-weak-and-proud-of-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/2020\/08\/doubly-weak-and-proud-of-it\/","title":{"rendered":"Doubly Weak and Proud of It!"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n

When it comes to categorizing and labeling Hebrew verbs, we can do so in several ways. First, we can look at what general patterns (“stems” or \u05d1\u05bc\u05b4\u05e0\u05b0\u05d9\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd<\/span>) the verb appears. This is similar to Latin’s verb conjugations, by which nouns are categorized by the forms they take in the infinitive (whether -\u0101re<\/span>, -\u0113re<\/span>, -ere<\/span>, or -\u012bre<\/span>). In Hebrew, roots may appear generally in seven stems, though there are a few outliers here and there in peculiar stems as well, and we can label verbs as “qal” or “piel” or “hiphil” (or whatever stem they appear in by their nature).<\/p>\n

Another common way to group Hebrew verbs is by the gutturals or vowel letters that they contain and the position in which they are found in the root.<\/p>\n

The guttural letters<\/strong> are \u02bealef<\/span> (\u05d0<\/span>), heh<\/span> (\u05d4<\/span>), \u1e25et<\/span> (\u05d7<\/span>), and \u02bfayin<\/span> (\u05e2<\/span>). Resh<\/span> (\u05e8<\/span>) is sometimes included in the list because it behaves similarly to them. The vowel letters<\/strong> (know in Latin as matres lectionis<\/em>) are heh<\/span> (\u05d4<\/span>), vav<\/span> (\u05d5<\/span>), and yod<\/span> (\u05d9<\/span>). Notice that heh<\/span> is both a guttural and a mater lectionis<\/em> (sg. of matres lectionis<\/em>). Since nun<\/span> (\u05e0<\/span>) tends to assimilate into other letters, many roots with nun<\/span> are also considered weak, depending on its position in the word. When these letters appear in a root, they mess up the normal pattern, and those mess-ups are predictable and regular.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

For example, the normal pattern for qal imperfect 3ms is \u05d9\u05b4\u05e7\u05b0\u05d8\u05b9\u05dc<\/span> yiq\u1e6d\u014dl<\/span>. We see this in \u05d9\u05b4\u05e9\u05c1\u05b0\u05de\u05b9\u05e8<\/span> yi\u0161m\u014dr<\/span> “he will guard” and \u05d9\u05b4\u05e1\u05b0\u05d2\u05bc\u05b9\u05e8<\/span> yisg\u014dr<\/span> “he will close.” However, as soon as we put a guttural in the first position, we see that the i<\/span> changes to a<\/span> or e<\/span>\u2014sometimes even to o\u0304<\/span> or u\u0302<\/span>! So, we find the qal imperfect 3ms forms \u05d9\u05b6\u05d7\u05b0\u05e1\u05b7\u05e8<\/span> yeh\u0323sar<\/span> “he will lack,” \u05d9\u05b7\u05d7\u05b0\u05e9\u05c1\u05b9\u05d1<\/span> yah\u0323s\u030co\u0304b\u0331<\/span> “he will think,” \u05d9\u05b9\u05d0\u05db\u05b7\u05dc<\/span> yo\u0304\u02bek\u0331al<\/span> “he will eat,” and \u05d9\u05d5\u05bc\u05db\u05b7\u05dc<\/span> yu\u0302k\u0331al<\/span> “he will be able,” granting that some verbs take an o<\/span>-theme vowel while others take an a<\/span>-theme vowel in the imperfect (in the tone syllable of the 3ms).<\/p>\n

Roots that have vav<\/span> or yod<\/span> often see these letters either disappear completely (\u05e7\u05d5\u05bc\u05dd \u2190 \u05e7\u05b8\u05dd<\/span>) or coalesce into something else (\u05d9\u05b8\u05dc\u05b7\u05d3 \u2190 \u05e0\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc\u05b7\u05d3<\/span>). In my opinion, these are the most interesting verbs that we have in Hebrew. Who wants a boring old strong verb that never breaks the pattern when you can have a rebellious weak verb with vav or yod that shoots out on its own and demands attention?!<\/p>\n

With that in mind, it’s even better to see that Hebrew has what are called doubly weak roots<\/span>\u2014roots that are weak in two<\/span> of their letters. Seow (1995, p. 25) shares the following about weak radicals:<\/p>\n

Word patterns can sometimes be problematic because some radicals are more susceptible to change than others. Such radicals are said to be weak<\/em>, and a root with such a radical is called a weak root<\/em>. By the same token, a root with two weak radicals is regarded as doubly weak<\/em>. It is common to treat the nouns and verbs with these radicals as irregular. But then the number of “irregularities” in Hebrew becomes enormous, and the task of memorizing the forms daunting. The weak radicals are, in fact, not difficult to understand, once their idiosyncrasies are isolated. A good grasp now of how these radicals behave will greatly facilitate learning Hebrew forms later on.<\/p>\n

He then goes on to lay out these “idiosyncracies” as:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n
      \n
    1. Gutturals do not accept doubling with dagesh. They exhibit either compensatory lengthening<\/em> or virtual doubling<\/em>.<\/li>\n
    2. Gutturals take composite sheva over vocal sheva.<\/li>\n
    3. Gutturals prefer a<\/em>-class vowels.<\/li>\n
    4. Nun tends to assimilate into other consonants.<\/li>\n
    5. Vav rarely stands at the beginning of a word. Roots that were originally I-Vav appear in Hebrew as if they were I-Yod.<\/li>\n
    6. Original aw<\/span> diphthong became o\u0302<\/span> (like \u05de\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea<\/span>) when unstressed and a\u0304\u0301ve<\/span> (like \u05de\u05b8\u05ab\u05d5\u05b6\u05ea<\/span>) when stressed.<\/li>\n
    7. Original ay<\/span> became e\u0302<\/span> (like \u05e2\u05b5\u05d9\u05df<\/span>) when unstressed and a\u0301yi<\/span> (like \u05e2\u05b7\u05ab\u05d9\u05b4\u05df<\/span>) when stressed.<\/li>\n
    8. III-Heh roots are really III-Vav or III-Yod that have shifted over time.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      With these rules, which Seow elucidates on pages 26\u201332 of his grammar, you can generally know what to expect with weak verbs. He gives several examples and breaks down the groups more clearly in those pages.<\/p>\n

      An interesting example of a doubly weak root is \u05e0\u05db\u05f4\u05d4<\/span>, which appears in the hiphil stem as \u05d4\u05b4\u05db\u05bc\u05b8\u05d4<\/span> “he struck.” We can already see the loss of the nun from the root. When we switch to the infinitive construct, we also lose the heh (which is really a yod, since III-Heh roots are really III-Yod), thus: \u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea<\/span> “to strike.” The only letter of the root that we are left with is the kaf! This is the excitement that is weak verbs\u2014recognizing the root of the word by its idiosyncrasies. If we know that infinitives ending in \u25cc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea<\/span> almost always have a dropped \u05d4<\/span> in there, this returns two root letters to us\u2014and if we know that I-Nun roots exhibit assimilation in the hiphil, then we can easily get the full root from these clues.<\/p>\n

      As you get into reading more and more Hebrew, I hope that you will get to the point of enjoying the weak verbs (and especially the doubly<\/em> weak ones) for the treats that they are. You can be sure that these verbs are proud of their individuality, and once you’ve learned to recognize them (and to understand them upon sight), I’m sure that sense of pride will become yours as well! Here are just a couple of examples of some fun hiphil words for you to consider:<\/p>\n

      [The hiphil perfect 3ms pattern is \u05d4\u05b4\u05e7\u05b0\u05d8\u05b4\u05d9\u05dc<\/span>.]<\/span>
      \n\u05d4\u05b4\u25cc\u05b0\u25cc\u05b4\u05d9\u25cc + \u05e0\u05d2\u05e2 \u2190 *\u05d4\u05b4\u05e0\u05b0\u05d2\u05bc\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2 \u2190 *\u05d4\u05b4\u05d2\u05b0\u05d2\u05bc\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2 \u2190 \u05d4\u05b4\u05d2\u05bc\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b7<\/span><\/p>\n

      The hiphil perfect 3ms pattern is hiqt\u0323i\u0302l<\/span> (that is, hiCCi\u0302C in which C stands for any root consonant, represented by \u25cc<\/span> in the Hebrew above). When you plug the root letters \u05e0\u05d2\u05f4\u05e2<\/span> into that pattern (into the C or \u25cc<\/span> positions), you get hiNGi\u0302\u02bf<\/span>. The nun assimilates to the sound of the gimel<\/span> (ng \u2192 gg<\/span>), creating a doubled gimel<\/span>, which then reduces into gimel<\/span> with dagesh forte (\u05d2\u05d2 \u2190 \u05d2\u05bc<\/span>). From here, the final \u02bfayin<\/span> takes a “furtive patach” (since it follows a long vowel), and we get hingi\u0302\u02bf<\/span> becoming higgi\u0302\u02bf<\/span> and then finally becoming higgi\u0302a\u02bf<\/span>, which is the final form for \u05d4\u05b4\u05d2\u05bc\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b7<\/span> “he arrived.” Identical to this is how the verb \u05e0\u05b8\u05e1\u05b7\u05e2<\/span> “he traveled” becomes \u05d4\u05b4\u05e1\u05bc\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b7<\/span> hissi\u0302a\u02bf<\/span> “he took (someone somewhere)” or “he gave (someone) a ride.”<\/p>\n

      [The hiphil infinitive construct pattern is \u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05e7\u05b0\u05d8\u05b4\u05d9\u05dc<\/span>.]<\/span>
      \n\u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u25cc\u05b0\u25cc\u05b4\u05d9\u25cc + \u05e0\u05d8\u05d4 \u2190 *\u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05e0\u05b0\u05d8\u05b4\u05d9\u05d4 \u2190 *\u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05d8\u05b0\u05d8\u05b4\u05d9\u05d4 \u2190 *\u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05d8\u05bc\u05b4\u05d9\u05d4 \u2190 \u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05d8\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea<\/span><\/p>\n

      The hiphil infinitive construct pattern is l\u0259haqt\u0323i\u0302l<\/span> (that is, l\u0259haCCi\u0302C in which C stands for any root consonant, represented by \u25cc<\/span> in the Hebrew above). When you plug the root letters \u05e0\u05d8\u05f4\u05d4<\/span> into that pattern (into the C or \u25cc<\/span> positions), you get l\u0259hant\u0323i\u0302h<\/span>. The nun<\/span> assimilates to the sound of the tet<\/span> (nt\u0323 \u2192 t\u0323t\u0323<\/span>), creating a doubled tet<\/span>, which then reduces into tet<\/span> with dagesh forte (\u05d8\u05d8 \u2190 \u05d8\u05bc<\/span>). From here, the final heh<\/span> in the infinitive construct is dropped and replaced by \u25cc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea<\/span>, and we get l\u0259hant\u0323i\u0302h<\/span> becoming l\u0259hat\u0323t\u0323i\u0302h<\/span> and then finally becoming l\u0259hat\u0323t\u0323o\u0302t\u0331<\/span>, which is the final form for \u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05d8\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea<\/span> “to slant, divert, lean (something) over.” Identical to this is how the root \u05e0\u05db\u05f4\u05d4<\/span> becomes \u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea<\/span> l\u0259hakko\u0302t\u0331<\/span> “to hit, strike.”<\/p>\n

      I know that’s a lot of information, and there’s so much more that could be discussed about weak verbs, but I just wanted to lay out a bit of what gets me excited about weak roots and how they behave. Especially those that are doubly weak. Good luck in your studies, and I hope that you feel free to ask any questions on this and on any other topic related to Hebrew!<\/p>\n

      References<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Seow, C.L. (1995). A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew<\/span>. (Rev. Ed.). Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      When it comes to categorizing and labeling Hebrew verbs, we can do so in several ways. First, we can look at what general patterns (“stems” or \u05d1\u05bc\u05b4\u05e0\u05b0\u05d9\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd) the verb appears. This is similar to Latin’s verb conjugations, by which nouns are categorized by the forms they take in the infinitive (whether -\u0101re, -\u0113re, -ere, or […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"bgseo_title":"","bgseo_description":"","bgseo_robots_index":"","bgseo_robots_follow":"","_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[29,73,72,71],"class_list":["post-1280","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-categories","tag-grammar","tag-gutturals","tag-hiphil","tag-weak-roots"],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1280","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1280"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1280\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1339,"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1280\/revisions\/1339"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1280"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1280"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thehebrewcafe.com\/main\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1280"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}