# משקל קַטֶּ֫לֶת



## munz123

Shalom everyone

We often come across words of the form קַטֶּ֫לֶת. They all seem to denote nouns, e.g. אילת (doe) and חטאת (sin). Are there any exceptions to this?


----------



## Ali Smith

Words of the form קַטֶּ֫לֶת have _qattalt_ as their Proto-Hebrew base. However, חַטָּאת 'sin' cannot have this base, for if it did, it would have become חַטֹּאת. Remember, when you have a _qatl_-type segholate noun (or component in a noun) and the middle radical is an א, the א quiesces, which results in compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel, i.e. a > ā. Then, due to the Canaanite shift, this _ā_ turns into _ō_. Witness: raʼš > rāš > rōš רֹאשׁ 'head'.


----------



## Drink

חטאת certainly comes from the qaTTalt- pattern.


----------



## Ali Smith

Then why didn't the Canaanite shift occur in it?


----------



## Drink

Maybe because the consonant sound was preserved until after the Canaanite shift occurred? I don't know. You can speculate why things may have happened the way they did, but you can't deny that they happened.


----------



## Ali Smith

We can conclude that חַטָּאת 'sin' is a peculiarly tricky form resulting from something aberrant in the historical process.


----------



## Drink

Ali Smith said:


> We can conclude that חַטָּאת 'sin' is a peculiarly tricky form resulting from something aberrant in the historical process.


No we cannot conclude that, as it follows the usual pattern of feminine nouns ending in former -a’t-. Think of verbal participles as an example.


----------



## Ali Smith

Drink said:


> Think of verbal participles as an example.


What about קוראת? It’s a f.s. active participle from Qal.


----------



## Drink

It's a great example. You just have to take into account that it's originally -i’t- and not -a’t-.

But note how it also is different from the monosyllabic segolates like באר (< bi’r-) and זאב (< zi’b-).


----------

