Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Why no "to"-infinitive in pual and huf'al?

Post

Why no "to"-infinitive in pual and huf'al?

+4
−0

One of the infinitives in Hebrew is translated "to [verb]" and starts with ל, l. For example, ללמוד, lilmod, "to learn", and להשאר, l'hishaer, "to remain"; it's used often. But two of the verb constructions (binyanim), namely pual and huf'al, do not have this form. Why not?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (4 comments)
General comments
DonielF‭ wrote about 4 years ago

Take the root חנך. How would you theoretically construct an infinitive passive form out of its פועל and הפעיל forms which is distinct from להתחנך?

Dev-iL‭ wrote about 4 years ago

It may have something to do with the fact these constructions represent passive verb forms.

msh210‭ wrote about 4 years ago

@DonielF, dunno, maybe לְחֻנֵךְ and לְהָחְנֵךְ, but I'm not good enough at grammar to say that those make sense.

magicker72‭ wrote about 4 years ago

Consider בָּהְשַׁמָּה from Lev 26:43.