# להיות and its equivalent/s in Arabic



## refiZ

Hello everyone!

I was curious if anyone knew about the divergence to the root (שורש) for 'to be' in Hebrew and Arabic. They seem so different and it is strange that two languages which share so much would differ on this basic point. Does anybody know more about this? I can read articles in Hebrew too.


----------



## trigel

I'll make some quick remarks

k-w-n is found as "be" not only in Arabic, but also in Phoenician, a sister Canaanite language to Hebrew, so it's definitely not just a fluke unique to Arabic. Even in Hebrew it has a related meaning, set/establish/prepare. (e.g. כן, נכון, כיוון, הכין, התכוון, התכונן) On the other hand h-w/y-y as "be" seems to be a mainly Hebrew and Aramaic thing if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## refiZ

Thank you very much. This is exactly the  stuff I am looking for. 

However, I am still surprised by such a large change. The Indo-European family has preserved less essential things.


----------



## k8an

Hello,

That's true in a way -
French - être 
Spanish - estar/ser
Etc etc

i don't have an answer for the divergence. Arabic and Hebrew have much in common that the Romance languages don't. I guess sometimes they just diverged in different ways 

By the way, In Arabic, there is also بقى which in some dialects means the same thing (kind of).


----------



## arbelyoni

trigel said:


> I'll make some quick remarks
> 
> k-w-n is found as "be" not only in Arabic, but also in Phoenician, a sister Canaanite language to Hebrew, so it's definitely not just a fluke unique to Arabic. Even in Hebrew it has a related meaning, set/establish/prepare. (e.g. כן, נכון, כיוון, הכין, התכוון, התכונן) On the other hand h-w/y-y as "be" seems to be a mainly Hebrew and Aramaic thing if I'm not mistaken.


The equivalent root in Arabic is هوي (to fall down, to blow); the Hebrew meaning might be a metaphor of the former (to fall out).


----------



## fdb

arbelyoni said:


> The equivalent root in Arabic is هوي (to fall down, to blow); the Hebrew meaning might be a metaphor of the former (to fall out).



That is highly unlikely.


----------



## arbelyoni

fdb said:


> That is highly unlikely.


Why?


----------



## fdb

Because there is no real semantic similarity between "to fall" or "to blow" and "to be".


----------



## bazq

fdb said:


> Because there is no real semantic similarity between "to fall" or "to blow" and "to be".



In Hebrew the verb "to fall" (ליפול/לנפול) can take the meaning of "to happen". True, it's not "to be", but close.
Besides, Semitic roots have taken many meanings across various languages - some very far from one another.


----------

