B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

Hi:

I completely missed the word לְהֵרָאֹה - I thought it was Hiphil inf. construct but it is niphal.

I've reviewed why it's niphal, but what I'm stuck on is the ending - as this is a III-Hey verb, I would of thought the inf. construct would be

לְהֵרָאֹת or לְהֵרָאוֹת

what is happening in this word?

Glenn

Davidson says that הֵרָאֹה is infinitive absolute that is being used as infinitive construct. Normally, the infinitive absolute is not prefixed with the lamed, but sometimes it acts oddly. In Nehemiah, we found a few instances in which it was behaving like a perfect. Brought that up here on the forum, too, about two months ago (I think).

There's a comment in Henry Smith's commentary, and references to Gesenius and Stade's grammar:

https://archive.org/details/criticalsam ... 3/mode/2up

Says the same form is used as an infinitive construct also in Judges 13:21. Gesenius 1910 §75n for comment and §75y for reference to these two occurrences.

Jason Hare wrote:Davidson says that הֵרָאֹה is infinitive absolute that is being used as infinitive construct. Normally, the infinitive absolute is not prefixed with the lamed, but sometimes it acts oddly. In Nehemiah, we found a few instances in which it was behaving like a perfect. Brought that up here on the forum, too, about two months ago (I think).

My textbook (Practico & Pelt) lists the two forms of the Niphal Inf. Abs as נִבְנֹה and הִבָּנֵה (for the verb 'banah' = to build), so is it possible that when you prefix a lamed to either of these forms you get what's in 1 Sam 3:21 ???

Glenn

thanxs Andrew for the link!

Glenn

Get rid of those pesky dots and squiggles, then the consonantal text could have להראה be a Hophal infinitive.

Hophal is a funny binyam. It is used in three contexts:

• active causal, passive verb
• passive causal, active verb
• passive causal, passive verb

Only in the third case is it a true passive. The other two cases it is more of a middle, with both active and passive voices. I suspect that because it’s used as a middle voice, that it’s so often mispointed, often as a Hiphil, other times as other binyamim.

Accordingly, I read this usage as a Hophal infinitive, as indicated by the consonantal text.

Karl W. Randolph.

kwrandolph wrote:Get rid of those pesky dots and squiggles, then the consonantal text could have להראה be a Hophal infinitive.

Hophal is a funny binyam. It is used in three contexts:

• active causal, passive verb
• passive causal, active verb
• passive causal, passive verb

Only in the third case is it a true passive. The other two cases it is more of a middle, with both active and passive voices. I suspect that because it’s used as a middle voice, that it’s so often mispointed, often as a Hiphil, other times as other binyamim.

Accordingly, I read this usage as a Hophal infinitive, as indicated by the consonantal text.

Karl W. Randolph.

If it were anyone else, I would ask them to point להראה as a hophal infinitive to show us how they thought it should be pronounced. It is a feature of infinitive constructs on third-heh roots that the heh drops and becomes ות in the infinitive. I don't recall ever having seen רא״ה or any other third-heh root as a hophal infinitive. I don't know what the pattern would need to be for this to be true. I don't know how you're suggesting that we pronounce this on your proposal, which makes the proposal less than useful. Pealim.com doesn't list a hophal infinitive, and while the Hebrew Language Academy shows the infinitive for the hiphil of this root, it doesn't provide an infinitive for the hophal of the same root.

I've never seen such a thing, and I don't know how the hophal of רא״ה would be pronounced or even if such a form exists. I really don't think that hophal takes an infinitive construct at all, so I don't know how the consonantal text can be said to indicate that it should be read this way.

It's pointed in the text as a niphal.