Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Chapter Eight: On Imperatives That Differ Neither In Their First Vowel Nor In Their Last Vowel From The Past Verb Forms Derived From Them

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this chapter

+ Tax (if applicable)

Chapter Summary

It is an established fact in the language that imperatives are inferred from the future, even though this is only the case with active verbs. One can elide future prefixes from the beginnings of these forms, and put the heh of the imperative in place of the future prefix. All (resulting) imperatives come out with a final pataḥ and their past forms do not differ from them. The disjoined equivalent of a pataḥ is a qamaṣ. In short, one should refer הִתְעַנַּג and similar cases to the conjugational pattern התהלך rather than other conjugational patterns in the language. This way one can refer each secondary form to its primary form if one cannot see the difference between the imperative and the past. But if one does not know the primary form, one has no (basis) to judge about it.

Keywords: heh; imperatives; pataḥ; qamaṣ; verb



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    A Medieval Karaite Pedagogical Grammar of Hebrew — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation