# How to tell whether construct is  שם עצם+שם תואר או סמיכות



## htims

Shalom,
I am a new student of Hebrew and loving the language.
How can I tell whether a construct is a סמיכות(noun + noun) or a שם עצם+שם תואר (noun + adjective)?

I use Babylon and often type in words separately.
For example: גבינה צהובה when typed in as TWO separate words gives yellow cheese - שם עצם+שם תואר however typing it in as ONE word gives hard cheese -סמיכות

Is there a way to tell within a construct whether the words should be read 'together' or separately?

TIA


----------



## jdotjdot89

There are a number of ways to tell--though sometimes context is your only option.  Here is a list of general rules you can use, though obviously there are exceptions.  Be aware that some male nouns have female endings (ex: לילה) or vice versa in which case they follow the rules that their _endings_ would suggest, not their gender.

1) Masculine singular first noun (any ending)
This is not so difficult when there's an article involved (English "the", Hebrew "ה").  The example I'll use here is "foot", Heb. "כף רגל".  First, since there's no article, we just have to guess from context--we have to know that רגל isn't an adjective, hence it must be סמיכות.  If there _is_ an article, you will only see it attached to the second noun.  So "the foot" becomes "כף *ה*רגל".  Note that the ה is _only_ attached to the second noun.  This differs from the case of adj + noun, such as "the blue ball"/"הכדור הכחול", in which case you see the article on both noun and adjective.  So if you see only one ה, it's definitely סמיכות; if you see two, it's definitely not; and if you see none, you need to use context.

2) Feminine singular first noun (generally ends with ה or ת)
In the case of nouns that end with ה, the same rules apply as #1, except it's a little easier because when the nouns that end in ה are in סמיכות, the ה becomes a ת.  So in "Dome of the Rock"/"כיפת הסלע", the first noun--"כיפה" when alone--becomes "כיפ*ת*", making it clear that the word is in סמיכות with the second word.  Note here also the article only on the second noun.
In the case of nouns that end in ת, the noun doesn't change in סמיכות, so you have to use context and articles for clues like in #1.  Example: "kingdom"/"מלכות" versus "the kingdom of the Jews"/"מלכות היהודים".

3) Masculine plural first noun (generally ends with ים)
Same rules as #1, but also a little bit easier.  This is because the normal male ending changes when in סמיכות as well.  This time we'll use "sandal"/"סנדל ים".  In singular, the first noun is "סנדל", in plural "סנדלים".  When in סמיכות, the first noun changes to "סנדלי"/"סנדליי" (sandal-ey).  So we have "סנדל ים אחד" but "הרבה סנדלי ים".  The ending on the first noun makes it clear that it's סמיכות.

4) Feminine plural first noun (generally ends with ות)
Here, the situation is more ambigous like #1's, in that the ending of the first noun is the same regardless.  Let's take the case of "the girls of the house"/"בנות הבית".  On its own, the word "girls" is "בנות".  In סמיכות, it's still the same, as "בנות הבית".  You can tell from context and if there is an article attached to only one of the words rather than both or neither.

Hope this helps!


----------



## hadronic

So, from the above stated points, גבינה צהובה gvina tsehuba _cannot _be smikhut (גבינה would have to be גבינת instead).
(Note the "irregular" feminine form of צהוב tsahov)


----------



## jdotjdot89

hadronic said:


> So, from the above stated points, גבינה צהובה gvina tsehuba _cannot _be smikhut (גבינה would have to be גבינת instead).



Yes, it cannot be סמיכות.  The ending of the feminine noun, there being two articles, and the fact that "צהוב" is an adjective all mean that it's a noun + an adjective.


----------



## htims

Thanks jdotjdot89 and hadronic.
Your explanation jdotjdot89 is just what I was after!!


----------



## hadronic

jdotjdot89 said:


> ... there being two articles,...


 
Where do you see two articles ?


----------



## jdotjdot89

hadronic said:


> Where do you see two articles ?



I meant that the definite article (ה) is affixed to both גבינה and צהובה, as it should be according to Hebrew grammar.  The fact that the article is on both words shows that צהובה is an adjective rather than there being סמיכות.


----------



## lonelyheartsclubband

Hello to everyone!
In addition to the things said here, I would like to point out at a small phenomena.
There are some cases of *unreal *smichut. This grammatical phenomena can be found in some Hebrew books.
Some examples: כחול עיניים
גבוה קומה
Pay attention that those pairs of words consist actually from _adjective + noun._ Although they look like smichut and sound like it, they're not. 
Using this structure can embellish your Hebrew.


----------



## hadronic

jdotjdot89 said:


> I meant that the definite article (ה) is affixed to both גבינה and צהובה, as it should be according to Hebrew grammar. The fact that the article is on both words shows that צהובה is an adjective rather than there being סמיכות.


 
There is definitely NO article in front of either word.
OP wrote : גבינה צהובה, and not : *ה*גבינה *ה*צהובה


----------



## jdotjdot89

hadronic said:


> There is definitely NO article in front of either word.
> OP wrote : גבינה צהובה, and not : *ה*גבינה *ה*צהובה



Sorry, you're right; I didn't actually go look at the example again before posting.  That doesn't affect the conclusion, though.


----------



## scriptum

lonelyheartsclubband said:


> Pay attention that those pairs of words consist actually from _adjective + noun._ Although they look like smichut and sound like it, they're not.
> Using this structure can embellish your Hebrew.


Hmmm, excuse me. If something looks, sounds, feels, tastes and smells like smikhut, well, then it's smikhut.
The sequence adjective+substantive (גבה קומה) is a smikhut and, to the best of my knowledge, it is treated as such by grammarians.

Moreover, in the Bible the sequence substantive+adjective could be a smikhut, too (see Gesenius 128w, example: ציצת נובל). In Biblical Hebrew it probably would be possible to say: גבינת צהוב.
And furthermore, even the sequence substantive+adverb can be a smikhut: שנאת חינם.


----------



## hadronic

And also adverb + substantive : למרבה הצער.


----------



## scriptum

hadronic said:


> And also adverb + substantive : למרבה הצער.


To the best of my understanding, מרבה is a verb (להרבות) that governs a substantive (הצער).


----------

