B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

הִמּוֹל Genesis 17:13 What construction is this? Hiphil? Hiphil what form? Command? I'm stumped. How would it be translated?

Thank you.

It appears to me that both personal pronouns, HI of HIMOL, "he be circumcised", and the curtailed YI of the next YIMOL, is for the beneficiary (beneficiary!) of the act MUL. The YI of YIMOL of verse 14 identifies the performer (performer!) of the act, namely, the ערל AREL.

Notice the dagesh in the letter M following a xiriq.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

ivrit wrote: הִמּוֹל Genesis 17:13 What construction is this? Hiphil? Hiphil what form? Command? I'm stumped. How would it be translated?

Thank you.

Hophal. “Cause to be circumcized.”

Karl W. Randolph.

I observe that the HOPAL or HUPAL form, as is HU-$LAK הושלך 'been cast out', of Jer. 22:28, is with the personal pronoun HU הוא for the beneficiary of the act שלך $LK, positioned in front of the root, written nearly in full.

To the contrary, $ULAX שולח 'been sent out', of Ob. 1:1, is with the personal pronoun HU הוא for the beneficiary of the act שלח $LX, inside the root, as U only.

In $ALUAX שלוח 'is sent' of 1Ki. 14:7(6) the personal pronoun HU הוא for the beneficiary of the act שלח $LX, is also inside the root, and as U only.

In the form שלחוהו $LAX-U-HU, 'they have sent him', (see Jud. 19:25) the first U is for the performers of the act, while the next HU is for the beneficiary of the act שלח $LX.

In the name שלוחה $LUX-AH, 'tendril', of Is.16:8, the internal U and the final HA, are both for the spreading branch itself.

In the post biblical שליח $ALIAX, 'emissary', the internal personal pronoun I, short for היא HI, is for the person abiding by his duty.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Hello

The form המול is an absolute of Niphal - Root מול

המול ימול is a form of emphasizing the case Which using the absolute before the "imperfect" form.
and this style is common.

David Hunter writes
The form המול is an absolute of Niphal - Root מול
Here is Gen. 17:13
הִמּוֹל יִמּוֹל יְלִיד בֵּיתְךָ
NIV: "they must be circumcised"
As I see it
הִמּוֹל = היא-מול
יִמּוֹל = היא-מול
The only question is who is this היא, the performer of the act מול, or the beneficiary of the act מול

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Hi Isaac

Never heard of that method you use

absolutes don't have a body.

ducky wrote:Never heard of that method you use

His method is idiosyncratic. No one uses it. It is only confirmed in his own mind. You shouldn't be surprised never to have seen it or heard of it before.

David Hunter writes

Never heard of that method you use

The "method I use" is merely seeing the הִ HI of הִמּוֹל, and the יִ of יִמּוֹל, as היא, 'he'. Otherwise, what is it?

absolutes don't have a body.

What is this "absolutes", אבסולוטים, that "don't have a body"? A thing need not have a "body", it may even be but an idea.
Still, the act מול is done by somebody on somebody. Somebody causes somebody, else or even himself, to assume the state מול.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Hello

Every conjugation has an absolute, and as this name testifies about itself, it is a no-body and no-gender and no-sense.

and indeed the prefix H "shouldn't be" there
exactly like any other absolute for Pi'el and Qal doesn't have a prefix
טרף טרף יוסף - first טרף=tarof (Qal)
עשר אעשרנו לך - first עשר=aser (Pi'el)

and 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
(and maybe because of analogy for Hiph'il)

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.

if you are uncomfortable with the Niphal absolute, you should be the same with the other absolutes, and find them also some body-prefix.