# מלוות



## hadronic

Hello,

Could someone hint me to the right pronounciation and meaning of the word מלוות in the following sentence ? This word has so many possible readings (cf. Morfix), that I'm a little confused to find one matching the sentence.

הן העברית והן היידיש משמשות תורמות עיקריות לשפה הישראלית, והן מלוּות בתורמות נוספות רבות כמו רוסית, פולנית....

The nikkud on the first vav is not my adding.
Is this the verb "accompany", "lend", "borrow" ? 
Is the הן just before, the pronoun "they" (feminine), or is it like the "הן.... והן" of the begining ? (in which case מלוות would rather be a noun...)

Thanks.


----------



## פפאיה

Hi, 

As a native speaker I don't see this sentence as anything extraordinary, but the questions you raise make me look at it through the eyes of a language-learner, and I can see this is quite an interesting sentence. 
As for "מלוות" - maybe it would have been easier if it had three vavs in it - מלווות (no, it's weird). Yes, it's actually meluvot, and it means "they (feminine) are accompanied...". It is the plural feminine form of the verb "לווה" - luva - in the present tense (conjugation - פֻעל - pu'al).
It can't be either "lend" or "borrow" - "malvot" or "lovot" - because then it wouldn't have made sense with the "ב" in "בתורמות", because לווה (lava - borrowed) or הלווה (helva - lent) - aren't usually followed by "ב" (except for "מלווה בריבית", maybe, which means a person who lends money).
As for הן - as I said, it means "they" (feminine). I think that usually with the "הן... והן" structure, you only use "הן" twice, to express "this... and also that" so you may presume that the third is actually the subject of the second sentence that starts after the comma, with the "ו" in "והן".
I hope I helped, and that it wasn't too confusing. Feel free to ask more questions.


----------



## Maayan

I think the nikkud is incorrect. There's a kuubutz under the ל and not a shuruk.
The nikkud should be: מְלווֹת . (imagine there are three dots under the ל).


----------



## jdotjdot89

Maayan said:


> I think the nikkud is incorrect. There's a kuubutz under the ל and not a shuruk.
> The nikkud should be: מְלווֹת . (imagine there are three dots under the ל).



I agree.  It instantly becomes easier and more natural to read with Maayan's nikkud.


----------



## origumi

Maayan said:


> I think the nikkud is incorrect. There's a kuubutz under the ל and not a shuruk.
> The nikkud should be: מְלֻווֹת


But take into account that this was ktiv male, with nikkud only to resolve ambiguity. In ktiv male waw is used instead of kubutz, and once it's there, the most natural way of adding nikkud is shuruk.


----------



## Maayan

origumi said:


> But take into account that this was ktiv male, with nikkud only to resolve ambiguity. In ktiv male waw is used instead of kubutz, and once it's there, the most natural way of adding nikkud is shuruk.


 
But isn't there's a rule against triple Vav in Hebrew? What do you do in such case?


----------



## jdotjdot89

Maayan said:


> But isn't there's a rule against triple Vav in Hebrew? What do you do in such case?



Yes, and you do exactly what you did.  I suspect that origumi was actually in agreement with what you said.


----------



## origumi

As I understand the Academia rules - in such case there are three waw, for vowel - consonant - vowel. The consonant waw is not duplicated when appears near another waw.

See the 4 waw in וווו - "and his hook"..., but not וווווו (duplicate consonant waw) according to the rule above.

---

Changed to clarify the explanation above.


----------



## jdotjdot89

Fair enough--take back what I said in my last post.

I also am really going to go out of my way from now on to find excuses to write "וווו".


----------



## hadronic

Thank you all.



Maayan said:


> I think the nikkud is incorrect. There's a kuubutz under the ל and not a shuruk.
> The nikkud should be: מְלווֹת . (imagine there are three dots under the ל).


 
The וּ can have 2 functions : it may be a shuruq, as it may be a dageshed vav : meluvvot מְלֻוּוּת.
But if the first vav is a shuruq, where is the final "o" gone ? The only solution would be have it _haser _מְלוּוֺת , true ?
My concern would be then, do typical (printed) fonts distinguish between וֹ and וֺ    ?


----------



## hadronic

origumi said:


> As I understand the Academia rules - in such case there are three waw, for vowel - consonant - vowel. The consonant waw is not duplicated when appears near another waw.
> 
> See the 4 waw in וווו - "and his hook"..., but not וווווו (duplicate consonant waw) according to the rule above.


 
In case of vowel - consonant - vowel, even if you do not duplicate the consonantal vav, it still remains 3 vav's, doesn't it ? 
For example, the word _loveh_ לווה, in feminine plural, should give לווות, shouldn't it ? I mean, even in ktiv haser, you should have לוֹווֹת, and then, when you get rid of the nikkud, you get לווות. Does some rule forbid this triple-vav ?

The case of _meluvvot_ is quite different, as the first "u" wasn't supposed to be written _male, _that's the modern convention that made the triple-vav case occur. In _lovot_, the triple-vav is already in the "Biblical" form.


----------

