The Tenth Principle: On the elucidation of the vocalization of the class of roots quiescent in the final letter he, such as galah.

1. The Pattern Qal The he is divided into four forms. The first is that it appears quiescent at the end, as in galah. The second is that it disappears, as in galu. The third is that it is changed into a yod, as in galiti, and so on. And with the prefixed letters b-k-l-m, the first root letter is vocalized as in the strong roots.

And know that in the third-person masculine and feminine, the he sometimes changes into a mobile yod, as from ḥasah: tsur ḥasyo bo (Deuteronomy 32:37), bakh ḥasyah nafshi (Psalms 57:2), following the pattern of paqdu, paqedah.

2. The Participle In the singular, the he is quiescent, and it is usually preceded by a segol, as in goleh, in order to distinguish it from roots quiescent in aleph, which take a tsere, as in qore, as I wrote in its principle. And when it is joined to a short word or to a word with penultimate stress, it too takes a tsere [and then it has penultimate stress], as in va-yehi boneh ‘ir (Genesis 4:17), ‘oseh fele (Exodus 15:11), and many similar cases, which are counted according to the Masoretic tradition. And the feminine singular has a qamats before the he, as in Ester ‘asah (Esther 2:18). And in the masculine and feminine plural, the he disappears, as in golim, golot.

3. The Passive In it the he is changed into a mobile yod in all forms, and its vocalization is like that of the strong roots, as in galuy, geluyim, and so on.

The Infinitive The first root letter has a qamats, and the middle root letter has a ḥolam, with a quiescent he at the end when the infinitive is not joined to a prefixed letter (b-k-l-m) and when it is attached to verbs, as in ra’ah, ra’inu, ‘asah, ya‘aseh lo. When it is not attached to a verb, the final he takes a sheva, as in ra’oh fanekha lo filalti (Genesis 48:11), ‘asoh tsedaqah u-mishpat (Proverbs 21:3). Likewise, after verbs, as in hiskalta ‘asu (Genesis 31:28). When the infinitive is joined to a prefixed letter (b-k-l-m), the he changes to a quiescent vav, with an added tav at the end, as in be-galot, ke-galot, and so on. It is also found without any prefix, as in galot ha-aretz (Judges 18:30), and similar forms, which are rare. One instance is found joined to a verb with the added tav, as in heyot ehyeh kamokha (Psalms 50:21), and it has no parallel.

4. The Imperative In the singular it has a sheva, and the he is quiescent at the end, with a tsere before it, as in geleh. In the masculine plural and the feminine singular, the he disappears, as in gelu, geli. In the feminine plural, it is changed into a quiescent yod with a segol before it, as in ‘al Sha’ul be-khinah (2 Samuel 1:24), or sometimes without a yod, as in tse’ena u-re’ena (Song of Songs 3:11). Although tse’ena has the root yatsa, it comes according to the pattern of re’ena, in order to pair the words.

The Future You place the e-i-t-n letters upon the imperative, and you will obtain it; and its vocalization is like that of the strong roots. And behold, all the rules that I have mentioned in this pattern— the changing of the he into a yod or into a tav, or its complete disappearance— apply to all seven verbal patterns. And the vocalization of the first root letter and of the prefixed letters, such as the mem of the participles and passives, and the letters b-k-l-m and e-i-t-n of all the patterns, are vocalized as in the strong roots. Therefore there is no need to explain each one individually.

5. And know that the middle root letter in the past tense, in the third-person masculine singular, is qamats in all of them, as in galah, niglah, gullah, higlah—all alike. And in the future it is with segol, as in egleh, yigleh, tigleh, yugleh, hugleh, and so on. Likewise, the participle in the masculine singular has a segol, and in the feminine singular it has a qamats. And so too in the passives, except for the passive of the Qal pattern, as I wrote above in section three. And all the infinitives, when they appear with the prefixed letters b-k-l-m, have a final tav and a ḥolam before it. And all the imperatives are with a tsere, as in geleh, higleh, galleh, hugleh, and so on.

It is also important to know that most future forms in this class sometimes appear with the loss of the root he. In Qal: egal, yegal, tegal, negal, with a ḥiriq or segol on the middle radical and penultimate stress (mil‘el). There are also forms with the letters of e-i-t-n in a tsere, as in al tifan (Numbers 16:15) and va-teta‘ ba-midbar Be’er Sheva‘ (Genesis 21:14). In Nif‘al: egal, yegal, tegal, negal, with a sheva on the middle radical and a pataḥ elsewhere. In the patterns Pa‘al and Pu‘al, the loss of the he does not occur. In Hif‘il: egal, yegal, tegal, negal, with a segol on the middle radical. In Hitpa‘el: etgal, yitgal, titgal, nitgal.

6. And know that, for the most part, this loss occurs only with the conversive vav, as in Qal: va-yiven Elohim (Genesis 2:22); in Nif‘al: va-yiqar Elohim (Numbers 23:4); in Paʿal: va-yetsav Elohim (Genesis 2:16); in Hif‘il: va-yifen zanav el zanav (Judges 15:4); and in Hitpa‘el: va-yitgal betokh aholoh (Genesis 9:21). And your mnemonic sign is: ha-nissah davar elekha tila’eh (Job 4:2) with the he, and immediately after it is written tavo elekha ve-til’eh (ibid. 4:5) with the loss of the he. And only a few are found without the conversive vav, such as al tifen el minḥatam (Numbers 16:15), sod aḥer al tegal (Proverbs 25:9), ya‘as Hashem ‘immakhem (Ruth 1:8), and the like.

7. The Imperative In the singular it sometimes comes with the loss of the root he, as in Paʿal: tsav et benei Yisra’el (Numbers 28:2), gal me-‘alai (Psalms 119:22). In Hif‘il: heref mimmeni (Deuteronomy 9:14), harbeh kavseni (Psalms 51:4), shekhav ‘al mishkavkha ve-hitḥal (2 Samuel 13:5). But in Qal and in Nif‘al, the imperative never comes with the loss of the he.

8. And know that there are four roots whose final letter is he that never becomes quiescent. Your mnemonic for them is taganakh, that is: tamah (to be astonished), gavah (to be high), ganah (to reproach), kamah (to yearn). Therefore they are vocalized with a qamats and a pataḥ like the strong roots, and not like roots quiescent in he, which always have two qamats. Accordingly, the open forms take a mappiq to indicate their completeness. Thus, from gavah: va-yigbah Hashem Tseva’ot (Isaiah 5:16), ya‘an ki gavhu benot Tsiyon (Isaiah 3:16). From kamah: kamah lekha vesari (Psalms 63:2); and one may say kamahte, kamahati, even though such forms are not attested. From nogah: lo yigah sheviv esho (Job 18:5). From tamāh: hemah ra’u ken tamahu (Psalms 48:6), al titmah ‘al ha-ḥefets (Ecclesiastes 5:7), with a mappiq. But va-yitmahmehah (Genesis 19:16), and likewise hitmahmehu and tamahu (Isaiah 29:9), belong to the root mahmah, which is quadriliteral; therefore they are not included among the four mentioned above. And there is a dispute concerning va-telah erets Mitsrayim (Genesis 47:13), whether its root is la’ah or lahah; from it comes ke-mithlahleh ha-yoreh (Proverbs 26:18). But this controversy does not concern me, for I do not engage in hidden matters.