User:IlL/A Danified analytic Neo-Arabic/Ancient: Difference between revisions

m
Line 198: Line 198:


Verbs inherited the following forms from Biblical Hebrew:
Verbs inherited the following forms from Biblical Hebrew:
*perfect independent (from the BH waw-consecutive preterite), distinguished from the imperfect by stress
*preterite independent (from the BH waw-consecutive preterite), distinguished from the imperfect by stress
*imperfect independent (from the BH waw-consecutive imperfect)
*imperfect independent (from the BH waw-consecutive imperfect)
*perfect dependent (from the BH perfect)
*preterite dependent (from the BH perfect)
*imperfect dependent (from the BH imperfect)
*imperfect dependent (from the BH imperfect)
*imperative
*imperative
Line 210: Line 210:
*jussive (only survives in ''hajā'' 'to be')
*jussive (only survives in ''hajā'' 'to be')
*infinitive absolute
*infinitive absolute


The Biblical Hebrew distinction between waw-preterite and perfect, and waw-stative and future, became a purely syntactic one: The waw-consecutive is used as the default form, and the non-waw forms are used when pre-verbal particle is attached (such as ''lō'' 'not', ''him'' 'if', ''ha-'' 'question particle', ''hinni'' 'but'). This is similar to Old Irish verbal allomorphy between independent and dependent forms.
The Biblical Hebrew distinction between waw-preterite and perfect, and waw-stative and future, became a purely syntactic one: The waw-consecutive is used as the default form, and the non-waw forms are used when pre-verbal particle is attached (such as ''lō'' 'not', ''him'' 'if', ''ha-'' 'question particle', ''hinni'' 'but'). This is similar to Old Irish verbal allomorphy between independent and dependent forms.
Line 218: Line 217:
! || independent || dependent
! || independent || dependent
|-
|-
! perfect
! preterite
| ''wajjṓγal''<br/>'he ate' || ''lō haγál''<br/>'he did not eat'
| ''wajjṓγal''<br/>'he ate' || ''lō haγál''<br/>'he did not eat'
|-
|-
138,726

edits