This is the advantage of this forum, one learns here daily new and useful things about Hebrew.Never heard of that method you use
"conjugation" is English. It is better, methinks, not to impose English grammar on Hebrew. The Hebrew verb is a root plus personal pronouns for the involved actors. C'est tout. The rest of the sentence on "absolute it is a no-body and no-gender and no-sense" is not clear to me. Examples would help.Every conjugation has an absolute, and as this name testifies about itself, it is a no-body and no-gender and no-sense.
It is not an abstract "prefix H" but the personal pronoun היא, 'he', for the beneficiary of the act. Hebrew does not consist of abstract "prefixes", but of real words. It is not clear to me what you mean by "the prefix H "shouldn't be" there". It is there, the question is only what it signifies.and indeed the prefix H "shouldn't be" there exactly like any other absolute for Pi'el and Qal doesn't have a prefix
The internal O is the PP הוּא, 'he', for the poor soul torn apart by the beasts.exactly like any other absolute for Pi'el and Qal doesn't have a prefix
טרף טרף יוסף - first טרף=tarof (Qal)
Examples would be very welcome.Anyway, you don't need to look at this letter as if it has meaning. because if you do, What would you say about the other absolutes that don't have a prefix.
It is an interesting theory on a "prosthetic" H coming from from a "prosthetic" A. Actually, Hebrew speakers tend now days to drop the H all together. It is now only U and I for הוּא and היאand this H prefix for the Niphal may come to allow the pronunciation (as a prosthetic letter) and maybe it started as an Aleph prosthetic that in time turned to H
I am glad we dwell on these issues since they are so important to the understanding of the inner structure of the Hebrew Language.
Isaac Fried, Boston University