The Thirteenth Principle: On the elucidation of some of the rules concerning the compound classes of roots.

1. Behold, I have already written at the beginning of the First Treatise that the fundamental classes of roots are six, and these are the ones I have explained up to this point. Now I shall explain the remaining classes, which are compound formations derived from those six. There is no need to elaborate at length, for each of them proceeds according to the rules of the two classes from which it is composed. For example, the root natah is composed of roots deficient in the first letter and roots quiescent in the final letter. Thus, its nun follows the rule of the nun of nagash, and its he follows the rule of the he of galah. That is to say: in every place where the nun of nagash drops, or the he of galah becomes quiescent, so too the nun and the he of natah drop or become quiescent. The exception is the imperative: from nagash one says gash, geshu, with the loss of the nun; but from natah one cannot say teh or tu, rather one must say natah, netu. Likewise, from galah one may form the imperative in the pattern Paʿal as gal, tsav, with the loss of the he; but from natah one cannot say nat. And similarly with nasa: in every place where the aleph of qara is quiescent, the aleph of nasa is likewise quiescent, except in the infinitive, where the aleph moves with a sheva, as in set, beset, and so on.

2. And the class of roots quiescent at both ends is of three kinds. The first is where the first root letter is aleph and the final root letter is he, such as avah, afah. In these, the aleph follows the rule of roots quiescent in initial aleph, like akhal, and the he follows the rule of roots quiescent in final he, as in tifneh. The second is where the first root letter is yod and the final root letter is aleph, such as yare, yirat. These take a tsere according to the Paʿal pattern. The infinitive is yare or yera, and with the prefixed letters b-k-l-m: bi-yero, ke-yero, le-yero, mi-yero. The imperative is yera, as in yir’u et Hashem, with the aleph quiescent, for the shuruq of the vav belongs to the resh, and the aleph is quiescent to distinguish it from the verb of seeing, as it is written: ki lo yir’ani ha-adam va-ḥai. The future is ira, yira, tira, with quiescent yod; and in the feminine plural tir’ena, with quiescent aleph. In Nif‘al, the aleph changes to a vav, as in nora, ora. The third is where the first root letter is yod and the final root letter is he, such as yarah, yarita. Here the yod follows the rule of roots quiescent in initial yod, like yashav, and the he follows the rule of roots quiescent in final he, like galah, galita. The infinitive is yaroh, yiroh, and with the prefixed letters b-k-l-m: lirot, as in lirot be-mo ofel (Psalms 11:2). The imperative is yereh, yeru, and so on. The future is ireh, yireh; and with the loss of the he: ir, yir, tir, following the pattern of va-yif be-gadlo (Ezekiel 31:7) and va-tifi me’od (Ezekiel 16:13), whose root is yafah.

2. And the class of roots quiescent at both ends is of three kinds. The first is where the first root letter is aleph and the final root letter is he, such as avah, afah. Here the aleph follows the rule of roots quiescent in initial aleph, and the he follows the rule of roots quiescent in final he. The second is where the first root letter is yod and the final root letter is aleph, such as yatsa, yatsata, and the like. These take a tsere according to the Paʿal pattern.

The third is where the first root letter is yod and the final root letter is he, such as yarah, yarita, and the like. In these, the yod follows the rule of roots quiescent in initial yod, like yashav, and the he follows the rule of roots quiescent in final he, like galah, galita, except for the infinitive and the imperative, which come in full form with the first root letter expressed.

The Infinitive It is yira or yero; and with the prefixed letters b-k-l-m: bi-yero, ke-yero, le-yero, as in mi-penei David (1 Samuel 18:29).

The Imperative As in yir’u et Hashem qedoshav (Psalms 34:10), with the aleph quiescent; for the shuruq of the vav belongs to the resh, and the aleph is quiescent in order to distinguish it from the verb of seeing, since it is said: ki lo yir’ani ha-adam va-ḥai (Exodus 33:20). And from yarah one says yereh or yorah; and with the prefixed letters b-k-l-m: lirot be-mo ofel.

3. And the general rule is this: all types of compound roots whose first letter is yod never come with the loss of the first root letter, neither in the infinitive nor in the imperative, except for the roots yatsa and nasa, which do come with the loss of the first letter. Thus, from yatsa: tset, be-tset, ke-tset, and so on. And from nasa: set, ke-set, be-set, and so on; sa, se’u, and the like. And the future forms of yare are: ira, yira, with a quiescent yod; and from yarah: ireh, yireh, and so on. And with the loss of the he: ir, yir, and the like, following the pattern of va-yif be-gadlo (Ezekiel 31:7).

4. And the class of roots deficient at both ends is found only in the root natan. In the past tense, the final nun is dropped, as in natata, natati. In the imperative and in the future, the initial nun is dropped, as in ten, etten, yitten, and so on. In the infinitive, sometimes both ends are dropped, as in aḥel tet (Deuteronomy 2:25), be-tet Hashem (Numbers 5:21), where the expected form would have been be-tent, on the pattern of be-gashet. And the past tense is also found with the loss of both ends in the expression va-oyevai titta li ‘oref (2 Samuel 22:41).

5. And the class of quadriliteral roots—that is, roots of four letters, such as ve-sha‘asha‘ yonek (Isaiah 11:8)— is a compound of roots quiescent in the final letter and of doubled roots. The final he of the root has fallen away, and the first and middle root letters have been doubled, for its root is sha‘ah. Likewise toratekha sha‘asha‘ti (Psalms 119:70): both are from the pattern Paʿal. And in Paʿal, in the plural, tasha‘asha‘u (Isaiah 66:12); and in Hitpa‘el, be-ḥuqotekha eshta‘asha‘ (Psalms 119:16). There are also two roots of four letters that are distinct, meaning that no letter in them is doubled, namely karbel and karsam, as in yekharsmenah ḥazir mi-ya‘ar (Psalms 80:14), and ve-David mekharbel (1 Chronicles 15:27). As for the forms ratpesh and parshu, our Rabbis of blessed memory said that they are compound words: ratpesh = ratov + pash; parshu = perush + ziv.

6. Moreover, many forms derived from the class of doubled roots are also found following this same pattern, with the first root letter doubled after the middle root letter, for example: From galal: ve-gilgaltikha min ha-sela‘im (Jeremiah 51:25). From qalal: ve-hu lo fanim qilqel (Ecclesiastes 10:10). From salal: salselah ve-teromemekha (Proverbs 4:8). All of these are found only in the pattern Paʿal. Likewise, from the class quiescent in the middle letter: hinneh Hashem metaltelkha taltelah gaver (Isaiah 22:17), whose root is tul, as in va-yatilu et ha-kelim (Jonah 1:5). And those forms which the grammarians call “quadriliteral” because of the doubling of the final root letter, such as from shuv: meshovev, and from qum: mekomem, I have already demonstrated to be from the pattern Paʿal; there is no need to elaborate further here.

7. A verb of five letters is found only in a single instance, namely ḥamarmar, as in: panai ḥamarmaru bekhi (Job 16:16), and in pause: me‘ai ḥamarmaru. In this form both the middle and final root letters are doubled after the three original root letters, for its root is ḥmr. However, forms such as libbi saḥarḥar (Psalms 38:11) and hafakhpakh darko (Proverbs 21:8) are adjectival nouns, not verbs, like yeraqraq (“greenish”) or admadam (“reddish”).

8. There is also found a single five-letter form from the class of verbs with a final ה (lamed-he), namely: yefifita mibnei adam (Psalms 45:3), whose root is y-p-h (“beautiful”). In it, both the first and the second radicals are doubled, and it belongs to the qal stem. By contrast, ḥamarmar belongs to the pa‘el stem. Nevertheless, it is also possible to derive from it its corresponding parent stem, and to say: ḥamarmar, ḥamarmarta, ḥamarmarti, for the grammarians have stated that from every root for which a derived stem exists, one may construct its parent stem — and likewise the reverse. Thus, from: yiqqaḥ na me‘at mayim (Genesis 18:4) and yitten mayim ‘al zera‘ (Leviticus 11:38), both of which are in the pa‘el stem, we may derive their parent hif‘il forms and say: ha-leqiḥa, ha-netina.

9. Likewise, on the basis of a single attested form, one may construct the entire verbal paradigm. For example, from the word: hissamtaḥta kol ’oyevav (Psalms 89:43), we may also construct: • the participle: mesammiḥ, • the passive: mesummaḥ, • the infinitive and imperative: sameaḥ, • the imperfect (with prefix letters): ’esammeaḥ, yesammeaḥ. “May the LORD our God gladden us through His anointed servant.” Amen, selah.

Be strong, and let us be strengthened. May the scribe not be harmed.

The first part has been completed, namely the section on the verbs.

Now I shall begin the section on nouns, and I will explain all the patterns.

Completed, completed.

completed.