[YG Conlang Archives] > [westasianconlangs group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Kay wrote: > No. Forms of Quadriliteral verbs are different from those of triliteral > verbs. Although Form I of quadriliteral verbs is conjugated like Form II > of triliteral verbs, they are not identical and treated as different forms. That's exactly what I meant. In Hebrew they are treated as one form (Stem III or binyan-Pi"el) because they are conjugated in the same way: perfect _tirgem_ as _dibber_ imperfect _y6targem_ as _y6dabber_ act ppl _m6targem_ as _m6dabber_ Isn't it the same in Arabic? I look into the table and see (both marked as Stem II, btw!): perfect _tarjama_, _sallama_ imperfect _yutarjimu_, _yusallimu_ act ppl _mutarjim_, _musallim_ For my practical purposes that's more than enough. I don't care if theoretically they are considered different. ObConlang: I have not yet found any true quadriliteral verbs in Ugaritic material, but if I find any (or borrow from other Semitic natlangs), "Newgaritic" will treat them as Intensive Stem (qattala). -- Yitzik