Re: Epphatha Qs

On Jun 22, 2004, at 6:09 PM, Paul Roser wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:31:12 +0300, Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...>
> wrote:
>> Btw, thanks for using the term "tD"!  I learned those terms in my
>> Comparitive Semitic Linguistics class this year.  Yay for
>> non-language-specific names for paradigms! :)  Although i think we
>> learned them with capital letter first...
>
> When I studied Hebrew all of the paradigms were language-specific, as
> are
> all of the Arabic grammars that I've seen. Is there anyplace on-line
> that
> lays out these language-neutral paradigm names?
> Bfowol
There's a really technical PDF file at:
www.arts.uwa.edu.au/LingWWW/LIN325/Notes/Binyanim.pdf


On the second to last page it has a chart of their conception of how
the different paradigms are related.

In general, when it comes to structure:

G = 'simple' paradigm (Hebrew |pa`al|, Arabic |fa`ala|, Aramaic |p@`al|)
D = geminated middle root consonant
S = 'causative' paradigm with /?/ /h/ /s/ or /S/ prefix
N = paradigm with /n/ prefix
t = 'reflexive' paradigm based on G/D/S/N with addition of /t/
pre/in-fix

I'll have to double-check my notes though.


-Stephen (Steg)
  "there is darkness all around us;
   but if darkness *is*, and the darkness is of the forest -
   then the darkness must be good."
      ~ 'song of the BaMbuti in troubled times'