Proto-Austronesian Hebrew/Verbs

The confluence of the Semitic binyanim/aspect system and the Proto-Austonesian alignment/triggers is among the most labyrinthine combinations in the history of morphosyntactic amalgamation. In the realm of phonaesthetics, PAH progressivelty capitulated to its surroundings. Here, however, it subsumed and appropriated new processes while maintaining all of its original syntax.

History

PH

Hebrew system of voices

PH was a Nominative-Accusative language, favoring VSO 40% of the time. SVO occurred in 34% of cases, VOS 17%, OSV 5.3%, SOV 2.3%, and OSV 0.98%. Definite direct objects were marked with the preposition /eθ/. The enclitic, post-position location marker /ah/ was slowly giving way to the preposition /la/ and the relative clause marker /ʔaʃer/ was being replaced by the relative pronoun /ʃa+/. There was no tense per se, but a complex system of seven voices, two aspects, four moods and a binary system of reduplication. Most of these could be conjugated for person, number, and gender.

Most Hebrew grammars deem stems to have expressed either the active or the passive voice. They are said to be either ‘simple’, ‘intensive’, or ‘causative’. The hitha’el is was the ‘causative reflexive’. However, the medio-passive role of the niphal and the shadowy remnants of a Qal-passive voice make some Semitologists conjecture a nine-part system of nine binyanim in the earliest stages of Hebrew development, not seven

Reconstructed PH

	Simple	Intensive	Causative
Active	pa'al	pi'el	hif'al
MIddle	nif'al	hitpa'el	pu'alu
Passive	pu''al	šitpa'il	hof'al

PAn

PAn had the following proclitic case-markers: na for ergative, ta for accusative, and a for direct.

Reconstructed PAn Voice System

	Non-past	Past	Future	Dep.	Subjunct.
Actor	«um»	«inum»	r(a)- -un	Ø	-a
Direct	-en	«in»	r(a)- -en	-a	-ao
Local	-an	«in»-an	r(a)- -an	-i	-ai
Instrum.	i-	i- «in»-iu	r(a)- -un	-u	-au

There were four voices: Actor, Direct-Passive, Local-Passive and Instrumental-Passive (also known as the Benefactive). This system moves from Nominative-Accusative (N-A) alignment, to Ergative-Absolutive (E-A) alignment and beyond via a system of ‘triggers’ on the verb. VSO word-order made this easier to comprehend in real-time.

N-A alignment (e.g., English) puts the subject of an intransitive verb (S) and the agent of a transitive verb (A) in the same case, called ‘nominative’. The object of a transitive verb (O) is in a second case, called ‘accusative’. E-A treats A as its own case (‘ergative’) but S and O as the same case (‘absolutive’). Austronesian morphosyntactic alignment introduces two more terms to the matrix: a location of the action (L) and an instrument or beneficiary of the action (I). The system of triggers indicate which element will be in the ‘direct’ case (D). Other elements revert to their original cases. In the Local and Instrumental, S cannot be stated.

Stems

Within 500 years of their involuntary journey to Southeast Asia, the ancient Semitic peoples had come to see their various “stems” differently, because of their environment. The system encompassed voice, aspect, the Austronesian "trigger" system, and a simple system of Realis and Irrealis moods.

Certain prepositions became proclitic case-markers in PAH. Direct case was marked either with the inseparable-preposition ha+gemination ハッ (from the PH definite article hā ָה) or the inseparable-postposition reduplication+a ヽㇷ (from the PH directional Hā Locale -a ָה–) . The ergative case was marked with hen ヘン (הֶן), which meant something like ‘behold!’ in PH. The accusative marker was ta タ, a metathesis and ablaut of PH *ʔeθ אֵת־. The locative marker was ba バ, from PH ַּבְ/ּב . Benefactive was la ラ゜, from PH . לְ/לַ

Reconstructed PH Finite Verb Stem Usage Redistribution √QTL

	Non-Past			Past			Causative
	Perfect.	Imperf.	Subjunct.	Perfect.	Imperf.	Subjunct.	Perfect.	Imperf.	Subjunct.
Agent	qīttela	yiqattēl	qattil	qatala	yiqtolu	qutulu	hiqtīla	yaqtīl	haqtēl
Patient	hitqattela	yitqattēl	hutqattil	niqtala	yinqatelu	hinqatila	nitiqtela	yitqatīl	hiqtel
Local	quttala	yquttēl	ø	qutīla	yuqtalu	ø	hoqtala	yoqtal	ø
Bene.	šiqīttola	yišuqīttēl	ø	šuqtīla	yišqtalu	ø	šuqotōla	yišoqtīl	ø

Infinitive construct not in construct relationship should be the same as the imperative form.

Non-Finite Verb Stems

	Non-Past			Past			Causative
	Infinitive			Infinitive			Infinitive
	Abs.	Constr.	Part.	Abs.	Constr.	Part.	Abs.	Constr.	Part.
Actor	qattol	qattel	muqattilu	qātōl	qutul(a)	qōtilu	haqtilu	haqtīl	maqtīlu
Patient	hitqattal	hutqattul	muhitqattilu	hinqātōl	hinqātel	munniqtālu
Local	quttōl	ø	muquttālu		ø	qatūl	hoqtel	ø	mhoqtālu
Benefact.	šiqīttal	ø	mišqīttolu	šuqtala	ø	mušiqtolu	šoqatōl	ø	moqtolu

The centrality of D and O can be seen in suffixed pronouns/demonstratives in all the voices. The subject of the verb always reflected which argument was in the direct case. In every voice except the Patientive, the suffix represented O, the object of the verb. The Patientive was a special case, wherein if there was a suffix on the verb, it always matched the subject in person and number. In such a case, the verb functioned as a medio-passive, either reflexively or self-referentially. Most PH verbs that were found only in the Niphal came into PAH this way.

G-Stem a.k.a. Qatala a.k.a. Pa'al

The "standard" Semitic stem was commissioned to be the "actor" trigger. That is, this "voice" expects subject of an intransitive verb or the actor of a transitive verb to be in the direct case and the object of a transitive verb to be in the accusative.

		Completed	Progressive	Contemplative	Coh/Imp/Part
Sing.	1c	ŊaLaMtū	'aŊLuMu	'aŊLuM	'aŊLuMā
	2m	ŊaLaMtā	taŊLuMu	taŊLuM	ŊuLuM(a)
	2f	ŊaLaMtī	taŊLuMīna	taŊLuMī	ŊuLuMī
	3m	ŊaLōMa	yaŊLuMu	yaŊLuM	ŊōLiMu*
	3f	ŊaLaMō	taŊLuMu	taŊLuM	ŊōŊiMatu*
Dual	1c	ŊaLaMnāyā	naŊLuMā	naŊLuMā	naŊLuMa
	2c	ŊaLaMtumā	taŊLuMāna	taŊLuMā	ŊuLuMā
	3m	ŊaLaMā	yaŊLuMāna	yaŊLuMā	ŊōLiMaymi*
	3f	ŊaLaMtā	yaŊLuMāna	yaŊLuMā
Plural	1c	ŊaLaMnū	naŊLuMu	naŊLuM	naŊLuMa
	2m	ŊaLaMtumu	taŊLuMūna	taŊLuMū	ŊuLuMū
	2f	ŊaLaMtina	taŊLuMna	taŊLuM	ŊuLuMā
	3m	ŊaLaMū	yaŊLuMūna	yaŊLuMū	ŊōLiMīma*
	3f		taŊLuMna	taŊLuM	ŊōLiMōtu*

• participles are given in the nominative/direct

= Gp Stem a.k.a. Qutal a.k.a. Qal Passive

Aramaic seems to have made good use of what would be called in Hebrew the Qal Passive system, and it has come into PAH very intact. This is in contradistinction to Hebrew where it survived only in the participle. In PAH, it marked the "local" trigger.

		Completed	Progressive	Contemplative	Coh./Imp./Part.
Sing.	1c	Ŋ