# מלא תקווה



## sawyeric1

He’s hopeful a cure will be found
הוא מלא תקווה שתמצא תרופה 

Why isn't it "מלא של תקווה" - "full _of _hope"?

Thanks y'all


----------



## Amadé

Because "of" only translates to "של" when it indicates belonging, which isn't the case in this phrase.


----------



## shalom00

מלא is not a noun.
In this case, מלא תקווה is short for מלא בתקווה, roughly 'filled with hope'.
I would say that it is stronger than just 'hopeful'.


----------



## sawyeric1

Both מֻלָּא and מָלֵא mean "filled"? What's the 
MUR of that? I mean, it makes a difference? [meaning, usage, & register]-wise?


----------



## shalom00

I meant, in הוא מלא (ב)תקווה, 
מלא is an adjective meaning "full" or "filled".
It is not a verb here.


----------



## utopia

In english "of" can complement a verb.

In hebrew של can not!


----------



## Drink

The מלא in מלא תקווה is in the construct state.


----------



## utopia

It doesn't have to be:מְלֵא תקווה

and

מָלֵא תקווה


----------



## ystab

This phrase is considered as צירוף בינוני, which is comprised of a בינוני (a noun that can serve as a verb in the present tense) and an adverb. More examples are יושב ראש and יוצא דופן.

Recent Academy decision states it can be viewed also as construct state: 4.2 צירופי שמות וראשי תיבות  |  האקדמיה ללשון העברית (4.2 - ד).


----------



## shalom00

I studied the link you sent from the Academy.
I don't agree that it is relevant.
For one thing, it refers to constructs where the first word is a verb whose subject is the person or object being referred to.
For example, a יושב ראש is a chairman, he 'sits at the head'.
Here, in מלא תקווה, the first word is not a verb whose subject is the person referred to.
The person is not filling, that would be ממלא.
Even as a passive verb, it would be מתמלא.
An example like that referred to in the Academy decision would be ממלא מקום.


----------



## ystab

shalom00 said:


> I studied the link you sent from the Academy.
> I don't agree that it is relevant.
> For one thing, it refers to constructs where the first word is a verb whose subject is the person or object being referred to.
> For example, a יושב ראש is a chairman, he 'sits at the head'.
> Here, in מלא תקווה, the first word is not a verb whose subject is the person referred to.
> The person is not filling, that would be ממלא.
> Even as a passive verb, it would be מתמלא.
> An example like that referred to in the Academy decision would be ממלא מקום.



On the contrary. מלא can stand as a verb, in Binyan Qal, Mishqal Pa'el, just like רעב and ישן. Its meaning is to be full (a sort of stative verb), as רעב is to be hungry (past tense 1st person רעבתי ללחם).


----------



## shalom00

Your example of past tense for רעב and ישן just proves the point.
People use past and future tenses of רהב and ישן.\
No one ever uses a future tense of מלא. It is always היה מלא or יהיה מלא.
Even if in theory מלא could be a verb, no one ever uses it that way.


----------



## utopia

What we need to test is the plural:

אנחנו מלאים תקווה

אנחנו מלאי תקווה

In the bible we can see that in the singular masculine it's usually מָלֵא

ככלוב מָלא עוף... - jer. 5 27

ארך האבר מָלא הנוצה

There is only one occurance of מלא in smichut:

זקן עם מְלַא ימים - jeremiah, 6 11 (MLA YAMIM)

ALSO the feminine and the plural (masculine) in the bible are *not *in the construct!


----------



## Drink

utopia said:


> זקן עם מְלַא ימים - jeremiah, 6 11 (MLA YAMIM)



Not sure where you got the patach. I find זָקֵן עִם־מְלֵא יָמִים.


----------



## utopia

Maybe I hadn't seen well. It could have been MLE...

The words in the concordance are very small.


----------



## ystab

Well, I asked the Academy, and indeed it is צירוף בינוני, and you can say both מלאים תקווה and מלאי תקווה.


----------



## shalom00

Thanks, I concede the point.


----------

