Post History
In fact, the homonyms "את"—one of which shows the form ʾitt- with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew, and having the ...
Answer
#5: Post edited
by
David
·
2020-08-05T16:46:54Z (over 3 years ago)
fix another typo...
In fact, the homonyms "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew, and having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes—are etymologically two different words.- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
- > The uninflected form את *ʾet*, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin *et*, is the use of את *ʾet* in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי *kohen ʾet levi* ‘Cohen & Levi’).
- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
- In fact, the homonyms "את"—one of which shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew, and having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes—are etymologically two different words.
- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
- > The uninflected form את *ʾet*, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin *et*, is the use of את *ʾet* in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי *kohen ʾet levi* ‘Cohen & Levi’).
- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
#4: Post edited
by
David
·
2020-08-05T10:34:05Z (over 3 years ago)
typo!
In fact, the homonymns "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew, and having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes—are etymologically two different words.- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
- > The uninflected form את *ʾet*, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin *et*, is the use of את *ʾet* in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי *kohen ʾet levi* ‘Cohen & Levi’).
- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
- In fact, the homonyms "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew, and having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes—are etymologically two different words.
- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
- > The uninflected form את *ʾet*, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin *et*, is the use of את *ʾet* in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי *kohen ʾet levi* ‘Cohen & Levi’).
- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
#3: Post edited
by
David
·
2020-08-05T09:54:54Z (over 3 years ago)
improve syntax
In fact, the homonymns "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew—are etymologically two different words.- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
- > The uninflected form את *ʾet*, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin *et*, is the use of את *ʾet* in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי *kohen ʾet levi* ‘Cohen & Levi’).
- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
- In fact, the homonymns "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew, and having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes—are etymologically two different words.
- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
- > The uninflected form את *ʾet*, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin *et*, is the use of את *ʾet* in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי *kohen ʾet levi* ‘Cohen & Levi’).
- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
#2: Post edited
by
David
·
2020-08-05T09:52:30Z (over 3 years ago)
- In fact, the homonymns "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew—are etymologically two different words.
- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
> The uninflected form את ʾet, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin et, is the use of את ʾet in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי kohen ʾet levi ‘Cohen & Levi’).- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
- In fact, the homonymns "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew—are etymologically two different words.
- As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question:
- > The uninflected form את *ʾet*, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin *et*, is the use of את *ʾet* in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי *kohen ʾet levi* ‘Cohen & Levi’).
- So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility.
- [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>
#1: Initial revision
by
David
·
2020-08-05T09:50:38Z (over 3 years ago)
In fact, the homonymns "את"—one of which is shows the form *ʾitt-* with suffixes and is the preposition "with", the other having the form *ʾot-* with suffixes being the sign of the definite direct object in classical Hebrew—are etymologically two different words. As OP suggests, it is the former which is the lexeme used in Modern Hebrew in phrases like כהן את לוי. According to Mikhal Oren[^1] this "fossil" in Modern Hebrew is an example of the "comitative case", "which denotes the company in which an action is performed, or with whom or what an object or person is found." Oren suggests it may well have been influenced by the Latin *et*, again as noted in the question: > The uninflected form את ʾet, however, has fallen out of use, probably to avoid confusion with the homonymous accusative marker (an exception, likely brought about by the resemblance to Latin et, is the use of את ʾet in linking the names of business associates, as in כהן את לוי kohen ʾet levi ‘Cohen & Levi’). So it appears to be the case that OP has already got as far as professional linguists are prepared to go with this question: (1) this usage is a relic of the classical Hebrew preposition את (and *not* the "definite direct object" homonym); but (2) influence of Latin *et* remains a possibility. [^1]: Mikhal Oren, “Comitative: Modern Hebrew”, in: *Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics*, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 05 August 2020 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000639>