hithpael wayishtahu in Genesis 47:31 instead of the active?

Classical Hebrew morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Post Reply
philipengmann
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:43 am

hithpael wayishtahu in Genesis 47:31 instead of the active?

Post by philipengmann »

Dear Listees,

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.

Thank you.

Philip Engmann
User avatar
Ken M. Penner
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 12:31 pm

Re: hithpael wayishtahu in Genesis 47:31 instead of the acti

Post by Ken M. Penner »

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.
Ken M. Penner, Ph.D.
St. Francis Xavier University
User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 1920
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: hithpael wayishtahu in Genesis 47:31 instead of the acti

Post by Jason Hare »

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>
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.)
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: hithpael wayishtahu in Genesis 47:31 instead of the acti

Post by kwrandolph »

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
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?

The verb in question is listed in Lisowski concordance as שחה, listed as a Qal form in Isaiah 51:23 and as a Hiphil in Proverbs 12:25 and well over a hundred times (I didn’t count) in Hithpoel. Or because the verb starts with a sibilant, the ת follows the ש.

Karl W. Randolph.
Post Reply