bhebrew.biblicalhumanities.org
http://bhebrew.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://bhebrew.biblicalhumanities.org/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=451
Joüon §79t wrote:Verb חיה: Hištafʿel form הִשְׁתַּחֲוָהto bow down, to prostrate oneself, to worship.
The original root is חוי, i.e. ל״י (cf. § a). The conjugation is hištafʿel (§ 59g; not Hitpaʿlel). The form expresses the causative reflexive action to bow down, to prostrate oneself.
In the perfect the primitive form is hištaḥway. The future *yištaḥway has become יִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה(3rd pl. יִשְׁתַּחֲווּ). The apocopated form is *yišta'ḥw, in which the consonantal w becomes the vowel u: וַיִּשְׁתַּ֫חוּ.
Joüon §59g wrote:In the light of Ugr. tštḥwy “she prostrates herself,” what used to be considered hitpa̧ʿlẹl, represented almost entirely by the frequent הִשְׁתַּחֲוָהto worship, to prostrate oneself, is most likely a Hištafʿel of √ חוי.
Note: This would then be the only residue in Hebrew of the Proto-Semitic causative morpheme š and the infix t. In addition to Semitic loanwords in Egyptian (Hoch 1994: 458, 481f.), the Ugr. causative conjugation is characterised by /š/, not /h/ or /ʾ/, which amply testifies to the widespread distribution of this morpheme in ancient North-West Semitic languages. See Cohen 2004a; cf. Kreuzer 1985 for an alternative etymology. On additional plausible vestiges of Shafel in Hebrew, see Soggin 1965; Rabin 1969; Wächter 1971.
Interestingly, modern Hebrew also has such a /š/ prefix for causality on some roots. For example, we have דרג related to levels or rating, and שדרג means to take something up a level, to upgrade. The root חזר refers to returning or going back, and שחזר means to make something return, to restore it or take it back. The root כפל has to do with doubling or multiplying, and שכפל means to duplicate something, to make a replica or copy of it. Do you think this is in any way tied to this old morpheme? Do you know if this happens at all in biblical Hebrew? (We might also look at the addition of a /t/ prefix, such as we have in דלק-תדלק and חזק-תחזק, for example.)Ken M. Penner wrote:Joüon §59g wrote:<snip>
Note: This would then be the only residue in Hebrew of the Proto-Semitic causative morpheme š and the infix t. In addition to Semitic loanwords in Egyptian (Hoch 1994: 458, 481f.), the Ugr. causative conjugation is characterised by /š/, not /h/ or /ʾ/, which amply testifies to the widespread distribution of this morpheme in ancient North-West Semitic languages.
</snip>
From what I’ve seen, it appears that the hithpoel form focuses the action on the actor, almost always as a reflexive. Who says that it’s not active?philipengmann wrote:I was curious as to why the Hebrew writer used the hithpael wayishtahu in Genesis 47:31 whereas the active could have done just as well.
Philip Engmann