In 1QIsa^a, in Is. 42:3, there is a reading: יכבה.
Logos has determines this verb as: Verb, Piel, Active, preterite, singualr, masculine, 3rd person. With as suffix: 3 sing. feminine.
I can't see how this determination of this verb is correct. Can someone please help me with a better determination?
I shoudn't say anything, because I haven't read nor studied the text, but by seeing the form and morphological tagging, it seems like the tagger has analyzed the non-energetic form as
yechabbeehaa (can't somehow type hebrew into this post)??
Anchor Yale commentary note says:
1QIsaa has ykbh without suffix, probably correctly.
In my opinion it's a Qal or a Piel without a suffix.
Haven't looked at it myself. But you won't find a database anywhere that is free from disputable parsings.
Niko: it seems like the tagger has analyzed the non-energetic form as yechabbeehaa (can't somehow type hebrew into this post)?? Anchor Yale commentary note says: 1QIsaa has ykbh without suffix, probably correctly.
it seems like the tagger has analyzed the non-energetic form as
WBC says:
MT יכבנה “he will put it out.” DSSIsa יכבה omits the suff, parallel to ישבור “shatter” before.
Simon: I can't see how this determination of this verb is correct. Can someone please help me with a better determination?
Okay, how about this:
יכבה Verb, Qal, Active, Prefixed (imperfect), singular, masculine, third person
חַפְּשׂוּ בַּתּוֹרָה הֵיטֵב וְאַל תִּסְתַּמְּכוּ עַל דְּבָרַי
Isn't the meaning of the qal intransitive? So piel?
Niko: Isn't the meaning of the qal intransitive? So piel?
Piel 3 sing. masculine (with no suffix) would be my guess too.
Thanks to everyone in this topic for helping me out.
Simon: Piel 3 sing. masculine (with no suffix) would be my guess too.
I think that's a very educated guess.
LXX: καὶ λίνον καπνιζόμενον οὐ σβέσει Targum Jonathan: וְחַשִיכַיָא דִכבֹוצִין עָמֵי לָא יְטַפֵי
LXX: καὶ λίνον καπνιζόμενον οὐ σβέσει
Targum Jonathan: וְחַשִיכַיָא דִכבֹוצִין עָמֵי לָא יְטַפֵי
The form we have in the Qumran text of Isaiah יכבה could be pointed this way יִכְבֶּה and if pointed that way would be the same form we find in 1 Sam 3:4 which could be a Qal?
But, I guess I see what you are saying.The MT of Isaiah 42:3 has יְכַבֶּ֑נָּה (a piel/yiqtol imperfect) which might be also be similar to the hypothetical יְכַב? Which might be what the Qumran text was meant to have. And represents a form that actually is used by Moses Ibn Ezra here (link):
כַּבֵּה חֲמַת הַכּוֹס בְּמֵי-שֶׁלֶג \ מַשְׁקֶה כמוֹ חָכָם יְכַב קָצֶף
נִרְאָה עֲלֵי פָּנָיו בְּעֵת הוּרַק \ בּוֹ מִשְּׂפַת בַּקְבֻּק כְּמוֹ-קָצֶף.