Indian Antiquary Vol 04

Author(s): Jas Burgess
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 39

JANUARY, 1875.]
SKETCH OF SABEAN GRAMMAR.
noun
(H. 193, 1) leads also to
(e); to the voice Pa'el belongs also D (ND, OS. VIII. 3) and we (wwD, O8. VI. 4, VII. 4-5, &c.). As the Pa'el (third Arabic form) is discerned only by the vowel, it is of course not visible in the text; but as this voice exists also in Ethiopic, it could not be wanting in Sabean.
The Paal, which answers to the Arabic ifta'al (8th conj. Ji) but is wanting in Ethiopic, is a much more interesting voice. Numerous examples of it occur: no (H. G.); anno (H. 187, 3), D (Naqab el Hajar, 1), ro (Os. XII. 5), Tins (H. 484, 4), or (H. 478, 16), from D,
.עככר קדס סרב
The voices formed by an external augmentation are the same as in Arabic and Ethiopic, only the physiognomy of the preformatives is more original than in those languages. For the Tafa'al (5th conj. JJ) we possess as examples (Fr. No. LV. XIV. 3; Os. v.), hon (Fr. No. LV.), Yon (win, II. 147, 1), on and tapan, whence the divine names-osano (H. 144, 6; 145, 3; 146, 3, &c.) and ann (H. 189, 1; 222, 1) are derived. The addition of a prefix serves to form the causative; this voice, identical with the Hebrew
, corresponds to the 7 of the other Semitic languages (Arabic 4th conj. J). As a proof that the is original, it may be adduced that instead of the Minaan and Hadramaut dialects regularly present the form ; but, as the change of the servile n into D is repeated in the pronoun, it becomes clear that the wo of these dialects implies the existence of a ; accordingly the x is a degradation of n, and no the a strengthening of x. This point will aid us in recognizing the nature of the Semitic verbal prefixes in general. The occurs very frequently in the inscriptions, as for example:
.Os. VIII הופיו) הופי; הקני,(.Fr. No. Liv ההורי) החות
3), TN (TANA, Os. X. 5), (, H. 681, 5-6; 682, 9) in the Minæan and Hadramaut dialect nino (H. 257, 1), (H. 353, 2; 63, 2), NED (DND, H. 257, 3). The voice Satfal (D) answers to the Arabic 10th conj. Jak which occurs also in
Ethiopic and Assyrian. The examples of this voice are numerous-ro (wono Os. XVI. 7), Do (Cruttenden Saná 1), o (mmino, H. 681, 4), pro (H. 51, 2), no (H. 535, 2).
The last voice is the Hinfa'al (E), the Arabic
7th conj. . The original
&
occurs also in Hebrew, especially in the Imperative; only one example of this voice can be produced: N (H. 237, 7); from this example, belonging to a Minean text, it may be seen that all the Sabean dialects agree on this point. This voice is probably the origin of the divine name m (H. 189. 191, 2, &c.), the root whereof appears to be me.
It may be presumed that the emphatic forms Patel (el) and tafa'el (sl), which are very common in Arabie and Ethiopic, existed likewise in Sabaan, as also the voices (x) and () which the Ethiopic has fully developed; but as these delicate shades concern merely the vowels, they are not perceptible in the texts.
29
As to the prefixed consonants which maintain themselves in Sabean in an original state, it is important to observe that the reflective is formed by then alone, without the support of a guttural, whilst the reciprocal form is preceded by an . This induces to the belief that this form (Arabic 5th conj.), instead of being identical with the Hebrew Hitpa'el, as is generally conceived, constitutes a simple and anterior element whence the Hebrew form composed of the causative and of the reflective n is derived. A similar remark also suggests itself with reference to the 7th Arabic form, which is usually iden tified with the Hebrew, without considering that it has for its organic form not the: alone, but
.(.c& בְּהִנְנִי contracted from בְּהִקְבֵץ הִנְנָּבֵל = הִנָּמֵל) הן
exactly as in Sabean, that is a compound formed from the causative and from a reciprocal; accordingly we may ask whether the of the Arabic infa'al represents the enfeeblement of the organic, or is perhaps merely paragogic (euphonic); and in that case it would represent the simple form, whence the Sabran and Hebrew forms were derived. The nature of the vowel attached to the personal letters of the Imperfect of this form appears to be in favour of the latter alternative. It is that in the imperfect the personal letters 281 2!!! 101 generally have the sound a way is tie &c. opposite to the Hebrew 2nd (3rd) and 4th forms,
(e), excepting the in which these letters
are pronounced with u:whilst the Hebrew has sheva:
J~11 /// 201
يقبل يقابل ) يقبل -
; d
. It