תַּעַבְדוּן Ex. 3:12, יִשְׁמְעוּן Ex. 4:9. "Paragogic" nun
Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 7:10 pm
One way Hebrew verbally relates the actor to his action is by adding his name at the end of the root, say:
שָמַעְתִּי = שמע-אתי, 'I heard', with the obsolete אתי for אני, 'I', to avoid confusion with שמעני = שמע-אני, 'he heard me'. Thus:
שָמַעְתָּ = שמע-אתה, 'you (M) heard'.
שָמַעְתְּ = שמע-את, 'you (F) heard'.
שָמַע, 'he heard'. With nothing affixed.
שָמְעְה = שמע-היא, 'she heard'.
שָמַעְנוּ = שמע-אנוּ, 'we heard'.
שְמַעְתֶּם = שמע-אתם, 'you (plural M) heard'.
שְמַעְתֶּן = שמע-אתן, 'you (plural F) heard'.
שָמְעוּ = שמע-הוּא, 'they heard'.
The curt last form שָמְעוּ = שמע-הוּא is surprisingly out of line with the rest as we expect from the systematics to hear שמעהם = שמע-הם. However, this form is again dismissed for fear of confusing it with שמעם, 'he heard them'.
The affixed form is firmly used now to indicate a done action. The form of a root with a prefixed personal pronoun for the actor is used now for a future or promised action, say:
יִשְמַע = היא-שמע, 'he will hear'.
In case of several actors, a complementing indicator is added to the end (end!) of the verb, to wit:
יִשְמְעוּ = היא-שמע-הוּא, 'they (M) will hear', with a mere הוּא for the plural, but a fuller
תִּשְמַעְנָה = תי-שמע-הנה, 'they (F) will hear'.
The rare form יִשְׁמְעוּן = היא-שמע-הוּן is thus but a fuller form of יִשְׁמְעוּ. Why the editor of these lines fell here for the longer ( he certainly did not invent it on the spot), now discarded, form יִשְׁמְעוּן for the ordinary form יִשְמְעוּ is not revealed to us, we can only keep speculating, but it is clear that the extra nun is just a structural formality of no semantic implications; there is nothing "paragogic" about it, methinks.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
שָמַעְתִּי = שמע-אתי, 'I heard', with the obsolete אתי for אני, 'I', to avoid confusion with שמעני = שמע-אני, 'he heard me'. Thus:
שָמַעְתָּ = שמע-אתה, 'you (M) heard'.
שָמַעְתְּ = שמע-את, 'you (F) heard'.
שָמַע, 'he heard'. With nothing affixed.
שָמְעְה = שמע-היא, 'she heard'.
שָמַעְנוּ = שמע-אנוּ, 'we heard'.
שְמַעְתֶּם = שמע-אתם, 'you (plural M) heard'.
שְמַעְתֶּן = שמע-אתן, 'you (plural F) heard'.
שָמְעוּ = שמע-הוּא, 'they heard'.
The curt last form שָמְעוּ = שמע-הוּא is surprisingly out of line with the rest as we expect from the systematics to hear שמעהם = שמע-הם. However, this form is again dismissed for fear of confusing it with שמעם, 'he heard them'.
The affixed form is firmly used now to indicate a done action. The form of a root with a prefixed personal pronoun for the actor is used now for a future or promised action, say:
יִשְמַע = היא-שמע, 'he will hear'.
In case of several actors, a complementing indicator is added to the end (end!) of the verb, to wit:
יִשְמְעוּ = היא-שמע-הוּא, 'they (M) will hear', with a mere הוּא for the plural, but a fuller
תִּשְמַעְנָה = תי-שמע-הנה, 'they (F) will hear'.
The rare form יִשְׁמְעוּן = היא-שמע-הוּן is thus but a fuller form of יִשְׁמְעוּ. Why the editor of these lines fell here for the longer ( he certainly did not invent it on the spot), now discarded, form יִשְׁמְעוּן for the ordinary form יִשְמְעוּ is not revealed to us, we can only keep speculating, but it is clear that the extra nun is just a structural formality of no semantic implications; there is nothing "paragogic" about it, methinks.
Isaac Fried, Boston University