Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/125

 a strong consonant, especially, it seems, a sibilant, liquid or guttural. Finally, further modifications of the same root are produced when either a consonant of the root, or the letter which has been added, changes by phonetic laws into a kindred letter (see the examples below). Usually such a change of sound is accompanied by a modification of meaning.

Examples: from the root (no doubt onomatopoetic, i.e. imitating the sound), which represents the fundamental idea of carving off, cutting in pieces, are derived directly:  and ; the latter also metaph. to decide, to judge (whence, Arab. qâḍi, a judge); also , , ,. With a dental instead of the sibilant,, , whence , ,. With the initial letter softened, the root becomes, whence , and ; cf. also Syr. to slay (sacrifice), to kill. With the greatest softening to and ; ; ;, , , , ; similarly , ; cf. also, ,. Allied to this root also is the series of stems which instead of a palatal begin with a guttural, e.g. ; cf. also, , , , and further , , , , , , , , , , , , , in the.

The root expresses the sound of humming, which is made with the mouth closed (μύω); hence, , ,  Arab. hámhama, to buzz, to hum, to snarl, &c.

As developments from the root cf. the stems, , , , ,. Not less numerous are the developments of the root  and many others.

Closer investigation of the subject suggests the following observations:

(a) These roots are mere abstractions from stems in actual use, and are themselves not used. They represent rather the hidden germs (semina) of the stems which appear in the language. Yet these stems are sometimes so short as to consist simply of the elements of the root itself, e.g.,. The ascertaining of the root and its meaning, although in many ways very difficult and hazardous, is of great lexicographical importance. It is a wholly different and much contested question whether there ever was a period in the development of the Semitic languages when purely biliteral roots, either isolated and invariable or combined with inflexions, served for the communication of thought. In such a case it would have to be admitted, that the language at first expressed extremely few elementary ideas, which were only gradually extended by additions to denote more delicate shades of meaning. At all events this process of transformation would belong to a period of the language which is entirely outside our range. At the most only the gradual multiplication of stems by means of phonetic change (see below) can be historically proved.

(b) Many of these monosyllabic words are clearly imitations of sounds, and