The definiteness of the construct string is inherited from the absolute form. If the final word in the string is definite, it passes that sense to the words that are connected to it. So, since אברהם is a proper name and definite, the phrase עבד אברהם is definite. You cannot put an article on עבד in such a situation.S_Walch wrote:Ah, right yes. So no definite articles with construct nouns and names?
I know that in modern Hebrew we use את after שאל. It makes sense to me to put ל because it would seem that you ask a question (accusative) to a person (indirect object). I think Hebrew just uses a double accusative, like with לִמד "he taught." You say שאלתי אותה את השאלה "I asked her the question" and לִמדתי את הילדים את הנושא "I taught my children the topic." There is no indirect object in these sentences.S_Walch wrote:וָאֶשְׁאַ֣ל לַנַַּּעֲרָה?
I just think that עמדי is the more "biblical" of the forms, and it was being simplified as time went one.S_Walch wrote:Knowing this is based mainly on Genesis stories, does Weingreen encourage the use of older forms?
Hmm.... A vocal sheva doesn't like to be up against another vocal sheva. This applies to regular vocal sheva (םְ as ə) and composite sheva (םֲ םֱ םֳ).S_Walch wrote:Cheers, Jason. So essentially 'ְ + 'ֲ = 'ַ ?
So, the infinitive construct of אכל is אֱכֹל if you attach a preposition, the vocal sheva will be adjusted:
לְ + אֱכֹל ← * לְאֱכֹל ← לֶאֱכֹל "to eat"
The sheva adjusts to the full vowel of the composite sheva, though there are a few exceptions (such as לאמר, לאדני and לאלהים, in which the alef quiesces and we get לֵאמֹר for *לֶאֱמֹר, לַאדֹנִי for *לַאֲדֹנִי and לֵאלֹהִים for *לֶאֱלֹהִים).
If it is two vocal shevas, one will become chirik.
לְ + שְׁפֹט ← *לְשְׁפֹט ← *לִשְׁפֹט ← לִשְׁפֹּט "to judge"
If the word begins with יְ (yod with sheva), it reduces to î.
לְ + יְהוּדָה ← *לְיְהוּדָה ← *לִיְהוּדָה ← לִיהוּדָה "to Judah"
לְ + יְרוּשָׁלִַם ← *לְיְרוּשָׁלִַם ← *לִיְרוּשָׁלִַם ← לִירוּשָׁלִַם "to Jerusalem"
This is actually one way that we can know that the Tetragrammaton should not be read as Yəhōvâ, since we should expect:
לְ + יְהוָֹה ← *לְיְהוָֹה ← *לִיְהוָֹה ← *לִיהוָֹה
Instead, we see the vowels of לַאדֹנָי copied directly onto לַיהוָֹה, since the vowels written on the Tetragrammaton do not belong to it. They are copied from the other word.