# Biblical Hebrew: ויאר



## zaw

Hi,

Is the verb ויאר in 2 Samuel 2:32 from the pa'al stem or niphal? Does it change the meaning?

וַיִּשְׂאוּ אֶת עֲשָׂהאֵל וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ בְּקֶבֶר אָבִיו אֲשֶׁר בֵּית לָחֶם וַיֵּלְכוּ כָל הַלַּיְלָה יוֹאָב וַאֲנָשָׁיו וַיֵּאֹר לָהֶם בְּחֶבְרוֹן.

Toda raba


----------



## Drink

Hmm... I never thought about it, but in form it could even be nif'al.

However, the semantics clarify that it is indeed pa'al.


----------



## Ali Smith

If by "pa'al" you mean "qal", then I don't think וַיֵּאֹר could be pa'al. The reason is II-waw/yod roots in the qal binyan have an _a_ in the first syllable in the prefix conjugation. Witness:

וַיָּ֥קׇם מֶֽלֶךְ־חָדָ֖שׁ עַל־מִצְרָ֑יִם אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹֽא־יָדַ֖ע אֶת־יוֹסֵֽף׃
(שמות א ח)

וַיָּ֧שֶׂם יְהֹוָ֛ה דָּבָ֖ר בְּפִ֣י בִלְעָ֑ם וַיֹּ֛אמֶר שׁ֥וּב אֶל־בָּלָ֖ק וְכֹ֥ה תְדַבֵּֽר׃
(במדבר כג ה)


----------



## radagasty

Ali Smith said:


> If by "pa'al" you mean "qal", then I don't think וַיֵּאֹר could be pa'al. The reason is II-waw/yod roots in the qal binyan have an _a_ in the first syllable in the prefix conjugation.



Things are not as clear-cut as this. For instance, בוש has _tsere_ as the prefix vowel in the Qal imperfect יֵבוֹשׁ.

In the case of אור, there is legitimate morphological uncertainty over whether וַיֵּאֹר should be interpreted as Qal of Niphal, but its meaning, here ‘to dawn’, suggests that it should be taken as the former.


----------



## zaw

Hi,

In 2 Samuel 2:32 what is the meaning of וַיֵּאֹר לָהֶם? I don't understand what is the subject of the verb. I also don't understand the meaning of the preposition ל. It was light for them? To them?

וַיִּשְׂאוּ אֶת עֲשָׂהאֵל וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ בְּקֶבֶר אָבִיו אֲשֶׁר בֵּית לָחֶם וַיֵּלְכוּ כָל הַלַּיְלָה יוֹאָב וַאֲנָשָׁיו וַיֵּאֹר לָהֶם בְּחֶבְרוֹן.

Toda raba


----------



## Drink

The subject is either the sun or the day, or an impersonal subject. In any case, the meaning is it became day.


----------



## Ali Smith

וַיִּשְׂאוּ֙ אֶת־עֲשָׂהאֵ֔ל וַֽיִּקְבְּרֻ֙הוּ֙ בְּקֶ֣בֶר אָבִ֔יו אֲשֶׁ֖ר בֵּ֣ית לָ֑חֶם וַיֵּלְכ֣וּ כׇל־הַלַּ֗יְלָה יוֹאָב֙ וַאֲנָשָׁ֔יו וַיֵּאֹ֥ר לָהֶ֖ם בְּחֶבְרֽוֹן׃
(שמואל ב ב לב)

And they lifted up Asahel and buried him in his father's tomb, which was in Bethlehem. Then Joab and his men walked all night and then [the day] became light on them in Hebron.

וַיֵּאֹ֥ר is particle, coordinating conjunction, waw-retentive + vb. 3m.s. short PC qal אור 'to be light'/'and it became light'


----------



## Ali Smith

Thanks. But why wasn't the short form of the prefix conjugation used? I mean the form corresponding to וַיָּ֥קׇם and וַיָּ֧שֶׂם.


----------



## Drink

Presumably, the short form (*yi’ar, as opposed to *yi’ōr(u) < *yi’ār(u)) could hypothetically have been preserved as וַיֵּאַר. However, due to the rarity of this specific verb pattern, the short form could easily have been lost. There are no attested instances of בוש in a relevant form for comparison, and I don't know of any other verbs of this pattern.


----------



## Ali Smith

Drink said:


> Hmm... I never thought about it, but in form it could even be nif'al.
> 
> However, the semantics clarify that it is indeed pa'al.


From the point of view of semantics why can't it be nif'al? I mean, we have verbs like nif'al כון 'to be firm, fixed, established', don't we?

וַיְצַ֣ו הַמֶּ֗לֶךְ אֶת־בְּנָיָ֙הוּ֙ בֶּן־יְה֣וֹיָדָ֔ע וַיֵּצֵ֕א וַיִּפְגַּע־בּ֖וֹ וַיָּמֹ֑ת וְהַמַּמְלָכָ֥ה נָכ֖וֹנָה בְּיַד־שְׁלֹמֹֽה׃
(מלכים א ב מו)


----------



## Drink

Not hypothetical semantics, but actual semantics. Look at how אור is used in qal, and look at how נאור is used in nif'al. The usage here matches the qal usage.


----------

