segolate verbs with final yod

[shamsuddin]

Hello

When you have a segolate verb, like the jussive of יבנה, it becomes yibn which then is treated like a segolate noun. What about segolate verbs with a final yod like יהיה? Why do they become יְהִי?

Thanks so much

 

[Drink]

When you have a segolate verb, like the jussive of יבנה, it becomes yibn which then is treated like a segolate noun.

Well not quite. I've never seen a segolate noun that looks like יִבֶן or יֵבְךְּ. More accurately, they sometimes behave similarly to segolate nouns.

What about segolate verbs with a final yod like יהיה? Why do they become יְהִי?

I'm not sure what's surprising here. How do you think a segolate noun with final yod behaves? Compare בְּכִי, כְּלִי, etc.

 

[aavichai]

יהי
yihy --> a linking vowel "i" comes in between the two linked consonants (hy) -->
yihiy --> the "hiy" turns to "hi" (long "i").
yihi --> when the stress is forward, the first vowel is turned to a Mobile Sheva -->
יְהִי

 

[Ali Smith]

Please remember that all III-yod Qal prefix-conjugation verbs have the base /yiqtal/, even if they were originally /yaqtul/ or /yaqtil/. In other words, all three bases have collapsed onto /yiqtal/, just as all three suffix-conjugation verb bases have collapsed onto /qatila/.

Now, there is at least one III-yod verb that behaves like a segholate noun when jussive: יֵ֫רֶא (whose base is /yiqt/, just like the /qitl/-base noun סֵ֫פֶר). However, for some reason, its base becomes /yaqt/ when preceded by the waw-retentive, i.e. יַרְא.

As for יִהְיֶה, its jussive form has the same base as a III-yod /qitl/-base segholate noun, such as פְּרִי. Observe:

yihyayø was the jussive base (while yihyayu was the indicative base), of course.

yihyayø → yihya → yihy → (through homorganic shift from the yod to the i-vowel) yihī → (I have no idea why the accent shifted to the final syllable) yəhī

However, Drink is right that most of the time, III-yod Qal prefix-conjugation jussive verbs do not behave the same way as III-yod segholate nouns. יֵ֫רֶא and יְהִי are exceptions.

 

[𒍑 𒉺𒋼𒋛 𒄑𒆵𒆠𒆤 𒉆 𒅗]

Please give example where III-yod Qal prefix-conjugation jussive verbs do not behave the same way as III-yod segholate nouns. Thanks.

 

[Drink]

Please give example where III-yod Qal prefix-conjugation jussive verbs do not behave the same way as III-yod segholate nouns. Thanks.

I think you're all mixed up here. III-yod qal jussive will consist of three letters: the first is the prefix, the second is the first root letter, and the third is second root letter. So in order for it to be comparable to a III-yod segolate, the verbs second root letter must also be yod. This is the case only for two verbs: היה and חיה, which have the jussive forms יהי and יחי. These forms do indeed behave just like III-yod segolates. But most other III-yod jussives, whose second root letter is not yod, do not fully behave like segolates. I gave examples of this already in a previous comment here.