Aramaic

Studies

Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

www.brill.nl/arst

The Causative Internal

Passive in Qumran Aramaic
Edward M. Cook

Abstract
Although the prevailing vocalism of the Aramaic causative internal passive is thought to
be Hoph#al, there is some evidence for an alternative vocalism with short /a/ in the first
syllable, therefore Haph#al. The orthographic renderings of the causative passive in Qumran
Aramaic suggest that the vocalism in that dialect was throughout Haph#al. Although it is
tempting to hypothesize that Haph#al was in fact the normal vocalism of the stem in all
ancient Aramaic, it is possible that Hoph#al was also used in some dialects. Finally, it is
suggested that the vocalism of the Ittaph#al stem is based on the Haph#al.
Keywords
Qumran; Aramaic; Causative; Passive; Morphology; Hoph#al; Orthography

The present study is devoted to a consideration of the internal vowel pattern

of one of the derivational verbal stems in Aramaic, that is, the causative stem
in the passive voice, usually referred to as the Hoph#al.
1. Varying Vocalisms of the Hoph#al in Aramaic
The internal passive pattern of the causative stem in Biblical Aramaic is the
Hoph#al, in which the underlying vocalism of the stem is {ua}1 (short /u/
after the preformative /h/ and before the first radical consonant, short /a/
between the second and third radical consonants), in contrast to the {ai}
pattern of the active Haph#el stem: active haCCiC ~ passive huCCaC. In the
Tiberian pointing of the Masoretic text, the first vowel is realized as short /u/
before doubled consonants (as in hussaq, Dan. 6.24) and as short /o/ in other
1)

Curly brackets enclose morphemes, backslashes phonemes; italics are used for derivational
patterns of words, surface realizations of words in texts, and for verbal roots.

Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010

DOI: 10.1163/147783510X571551

Edward M. Cook / Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

environments (e.g., honhat,

. Dan. 5.20). When the first radical consonant is
waw or aleph, the first syllable of the pattern is realized as /hu/ (as in hubad,
Dan. 7.11).2 This is the same vocalic pattern used in the Biblical Hebrew
causative passive.
There are, however, some inconsistencies to this picture of the {ua}
vocalism for the internal passive of the causative (hereinafter CP). First, the CP
participles display a short /a/ in the first syllable of the base instead of a short
/u/, as in mhah
. atn (Ezra 6.1) from the root nht.
. In fact, the {aa} vocalism
for the CP participle is a feature of all non-modern Aramaic dialects where the
vocalization is known. Some examples from dialects with vocalization or other
clear indications of vowel quality:
mah. hat
maqqap (Exod. 28.32, root nqp);
. (Gen. 8.11, root nht);
.
mah. hl
. a (Lev. 21.7, root hll).
.
Targum Jonathan:
massaq (Judg. 6.28, root slq); mat. tal
. (1 Sam. 17.6, root ntl);
. mattak
(1 Kgs 7.16, root ntk); ma.t#ann (Jer. 37.10, root .t#n); etc.
Palestinian Targum (Geniza fragments):
matqnyn (partially vocalized; Gen. 15.1, MS H,
(partially vocalized, Gen. 50.1, MS FF, root hzq).
root tqn); mahzqh
.
.
Pseudo-Jonathan:
m"hzryn
(Gen. 9.23, root hzr).
.
.
Syriac:
ma.t.tar (Ps. 109.7[8], root n.tr); mappaq (Thes. Syr. Col. 2424, root
npq); maqqpa (Thes. Syr. Col. 2459, root nqp); ma#.tpa (Apoc. 17.4,
root # tp);
. maprqan (Ezek. 41.6, root prq); etc.
Mandaic:
mpr"s, from prs; mmlk, from mlk; mdkr, from dkr; etc.3
Babylonian Aramaic: mahdaq, from hdq; mapsqan, from psq, etc.4
Targum Onqelos:

A second inconsistency is presented by the vocalization of the CP of the

root "ty, to come, in Biblical Aramaic, which occurs twice: hetayu (Perf.
third person masculine plural, Dan. 3.13), hetayit (Perf. third person feminine
singular, Dan. 6.18). Although the /ay/ diphthong in Biblical Aramaic does
not normally reduce in unaccented syllables, it is hard to see what other
origin the segment /he/ in these forms could have had, which must have
originated from the underlying forms *haytayu, *haytayat. Here, then, we have
a second witness to an alternative {aa} vocalism for the causative internal
passive.
2)
There are in all ten occurrences of the Hoph#al in the finite verb in Biblical Aramaic
(Dan. 4.33 [twice]; 5.13, 15, 20; 6.24; 7.4, 5, 11; Ezra 4.15).
3)
Examples taken from Theodor Nldeke, Mandische Grammatik (Halle: Verlag der
Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses, 1875; repr. Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2005), p. 230.
4)
Examples from Y. Epstein, Diqduq Aramit Bavlit (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1960),
p. 49.

Edward M. Cook / Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

Due to its gradual discontinuation, the Hoph#al appears in few other

vocalized traditions of Aramaic. The variant readings of Targums Onqelos
and Jonathan and the later Targumim have a few participles displaying a short
/u/ in the first syllable, instead of short /a/.5 These may be scribal errors or
Hebraisms, and the vast majority of CP participles in Late Aramaic show short
/a/ in the first syllable.
2. The Vocalism of the CP Stem in Qumran Aramaic
One of the last dialects of Aramaic to use the CP stem for finite verbal forms
was Qumran Aramaic, where it appears several times in a variety of texts. The
characteristic /h/ preformative of the stem has generally become the glottal
stop /"/, but in all other aspects the form, sometimes designated "Oph#al,6 is
considered to be the same as Biblical Aramaic.
However, there is evidence that the vocalization of the CP finite forms in
Qumran Aramaic follows the {aa} pattern, and not the {ua} pattern.
The following is a numbered list of occurrences of the CP with finite verbs
in Qumran Aramaic, in cave number order. Cases in which the reading is in
doubt are omitted.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Genesis Apocryphon: 6.11, "wd#t, I was informed, from yd#;

4Q196 fg 2, "tbt, she was returned, from twb;
4Q196 fg 2.1, "hwyt,
I was told, from hwy;
.
.
4Q204 fg 1 vi.23, "dbqt, I was caused to arrive, from dbq;
4Q204 fg 1 xii.27, "hzy"t,
I was caused to see, from hzy;
.
.
4Q204 fg 1 xii.30, "hzy"t,
I
was
caused
to
see,
from
hzy;
.
.
4Q204 fg 1 xiii.25, "wblt, I was transported, from ybl;
4Q204 fg 1 xiii.27, "hzyt,
I was caused to see, from hzy;
.
.
4Q205 fg 1 xi.3, "wblt, I was transported, from ybl;

5)
Fr das Partiz. Aphel mit Umlaut in u gibt es nur wenig sichere Beispeile, Gustaf
Dalman, Grammatik des Jdisch-Palstinischen Aramisch (Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 2nd edn,
1905; repr. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1981), p. 283. Some examples are
musq#an, TgEzek 28.13 (an error for msaq#an, the passive pa#el participle); mursan, TgExod
19.13 (an error for mrasan, passive pa#el participle); mwzmn, TgNeof Exod. 15.17 (an error
for mzwmn); TgPsJ Num. 8.24 mwpslyn (a Hebrew loan); etc. Targum Neofiti has the finite
form hwnht
. at Gen. 39.1, a form possibly influenced by Biblical Aramaic honha
. t (Dan.
5.20); the other Targumim read the Ct stem (Ittaph#al).
6)
Ursula Schattner-Rieser, Laramen des manuscrits de la mer Morte, I. Grammaire (Lausanne: ditions du Zebre, 2004), pp. 7475.

Edward M. Cook / Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

10. 4Q206 fg 1 xxvi.18, hwblt, I was transported, from ybl;

11. 4Q206 fg 1 xxvi.19, "hlp[t],
I was made to pass, from hlp;
.
.
12. 4Q206 fg 1 xxvi.20, " #brt, I was made to cross, from #br;
13. 4Q206 fg 1 xxvi.21, "hlpt,
I was made to pass, from hlp;
.
.
14. 4Q206 fg 1 xxvii.1, "hzyt,
I
was
caused
to
see,
from
hzy;
.
.
15. 4Q206 fg 1 xxvii.21, "hzyt,
I was caused to see, from hzy;
.
.
16. 4Q206 fg 29.3, "hzyt,
I was caused to see, from hzy;
.
.
17. 4Q213a fg 2.15, "hzyt,
I was caused to see, from hzy;
.
.
18. 4Q242 fg 4.1, "hlmt,
I
was
caused
to
recover,
from
hlm;
.
.
19. 4Q538 fg 12.2, "w[b]lt, I was transported, from ybl;
20. 4Q538 fg 12.2, " #lt, I was caused to enter, from #ll;
21. 4Q544 fg 3.1, "sl.tt, I was caused to rule, from sl.t.
In addition, a few CP participles are also attested: 4Q211 fg 1 i.2, mhtyn,
being
.
caused to fall, from nht;
. 4Q537 fg 9.2, mmryn, embittered, from mrr; 4Q537
fg 9.2, mqsyn, hardened from qsy; 4Q542 fg 1 i.4, mhslm",7 handed on from
slm.8
The use of waw in the orthography is limited to nos. 1, 7, 9, 10, and 19, where
the root of the verb is either yd# or ybl, and the quality of the vowel cannot
be determined, since the waw may indicate a vocalization of // (derived from
the segment /aw/)or // (derived from the segment /uw/). It will be observed
in the other cases that the short /u/ of the first syllable is never indicated by
means of waw. This is noteworthy because the indication of original short /u/
by waw is otherwise not uncommon in Qumran Aramaic, including most of
the texts from which the CP forms are cited.
Some examples are as follows: 4Q196: lqwdmy, fg 2.11 btrhwn, fg 6.1; l"wrh",
.
fg. 13.1, qwst",
. fg 17 ii.3, etc.; 4Q204: bhwn, fg 1 i.26; kwl, passim; klqwbl, fg 1
vi.13, 17; #wbd, fg 1 i.18; qwdmyhwn, fg 1 vi.7; qws.t", fg 1 v.4; etc; 4Q206 mnhwn,

7)

The h of the word is a supralinear addition.

Three other claimed examples of the CP have been omitted as improbable or uncertain.
The form "rhqt
. in 4Q204 fg 1 xii.23 and 4Q206 fg 1 xxvi.20 is probably an inner-transitive
use of the Aph#el, as in Hebrew, not a passive; the same is true of hh
. syw, 11QtgJob 21.7.
In addition, the reading "wht,
. which J. Fitzmyer takes as the "Oph#al of nht,
. at 1QapGen
6.3 (The Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave 1 (1Q20): A Commentary [Rome: Pontifical
Biblical Institute, 3rd edn, 2004], pp. 76, 146) has now been corrected (D. Machiela
reads "rht,
. see his Genesis Apocryphon (1Q20): A Reevaluation of its Text, Interpretive
Character, and Relationship to the Book of Jubilees [Univ. of Notre Dame dissertation,
2007], p. 142).
8)

Edward M. Cook / Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

fg 1 xxii.3, xxvi 19, etc; 4Q213a: kwl, fg. 3 + 4.6; qwds, fg. 3 + 4.8; 4Q538: kwl,
fg. 1 + 2.7; 4Q544: kwl, passim; l#wb #, fg. 1.3; 1QapGen qwst. (2.5, etc.), kwmr"
(12.15), twqp (20.14), etc.
Not only that, but the short u of the CP (Hoph#al) stem in Qumran
Hebrew is most of the time indicated by waw.9 Some examples are given
here, with no attempt to be exhaustive: hwbdl, 1QS 8.24, root bdl; hwgsty,
1QHa 6.18, root ngs; mwszr, 4Q365 fg 8ab.3, root szr; hwslkth, IQIsaa 14.19
(root slk, corresponding to Masoretic hoslakta); hwgd, IQIsaa 40.21 (root
ngd, corresponding to Masoretic huggad); hwhb"w,
IQIsaa 42.22 (root hb",
.
.
corresponding to Masoretic hohb
. a"u); mwbdlym, 11QT 35.13, root bdl; hwkh,
4Q158 fg 1012:5 (root nky, corresponding to Masoretic hukkah); etc.
Since the means of indicating original short /u/ were (1) available and (2)
widely used (in Qumran Aramaic, and in Qumran Hebrew for the Hebrew
CP stem), the fact that the short /u/ is never indicated in the CP stem is
significant, and suggests that there was in fact no short /u/ in this stem in
Qumran Aramaic, and that the most likely vocalization of the forms was {aa}
(haCCaC), in conformity with the vocalization of the CP participles across
Aramaic and the finite passive forms of "ty in Biblical Aramaic.
3. Was There Ever a Hoph#al in Aramaic?
Since the Biblical Aramaic Hoph#al is also not written with waw in the
Masoretic text,10 it is possible that the same haCCaC vocalization was originally
used in Biblical Aramaic, which is, at the latest, contemporary with the Qumran
Aramaic texts, but more likely stems from a somewhat earlier period. It may
have been the influence of the Biblical Hebrew reading tradition that caused the
Masoretes, centuries later, to vocalize the Aramaic CP as a Hebrew Hoph#al.
Although it is tempting to argue that there never was a Hoph#al as such in
any dialect of Aramaic, this goes beyond the evidence, and in fact, some
sporadic uses of the Hoph#al in later literary dialects, such as the Yemenite

9)
For a breakdown of Hebrew spellings of the Hoph#al by verb type (weak or strong), see
Martin G. Abegg, Jr., The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Peter W. Flint and James
C. VanderKam (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls After Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment
(Leiden: Brill, 1998), pp. 341342, 346, 350.
10)
The same is true of the sole Qumran witness to the Biblical Aramaic Hoph#al (4Q112 fg
1011.3 = Dan. 5.13), which is however only partially preserved.

10

Edward M. Cook / Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

tradition of Babylonian Aramaic11 and some Samaritan Aramaic texts,12 as well

as the remnants of the CP in the North-eastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) dialects
suggest that in some areas or registers there may have been in fact a (h)uCCaC
or (h)uCCiC vocalization of the CP.13
In the NENA dialects, the verbal paradigms of the past tense are constructed
on the basis of the passive participles of the earlier dialects, and the base of the
past causative is muCCiC, generally taken to be a reflex of the old Hoph#al;
hence, it is thought, these forms provide evidence of an ancient *huCCaC
vocalization. However, as already noted, the older Aramaic vocalization of the
CP participle is maCCaC across all literary dialects. The NENA muCCiC,
then, represents either an innovation or a survival of a form not attested in
the literary dialects. This issue is generally not addressed in grammars of the
NENA dialects.14
The scanty evidence we have, then, supports the idea of two possible
vocalizations of the CP stem in the Aramaic dialects, dierentiated by the
quality of the first syllable vowel, and that the preferred vocalism in the literary
texts may have been {aa} rather than {ua}.
Eventually the CP stem fell into disuse, at least in the literary dialects.
One reason was, no doubt, the increase in the use of the Ct stem (Ittaph#al)
for the causative passive voice. The use of the originally reflexive T-stems
for the passive was a common phenomenon throughout Aramaic. The Gt
(Ithpe#el) stem eventually replaced the internal passive of the G-stem, and
the Dt (Ithpa#al) likewise replaced the internal passive of the D-stem. These

11)

Sh. Morag, Aramit be-Masoret Teman: Leshon ha-Talmud ha-Bavli (Jerusalem: Hebrew
University, 1988), p. 161.
12)
For instance, concerning the Kahle MS of Memar Marqah, J. Macdonald says, Hoph#al
forms are more common in K than in any other MS. It is noteworthy that the revival
of Hebrew among the Samaritans took place only a little before the time when K
was written (Memar Marqah: The Teaching of Marqah, I. The Text [BZAW, 84; Berlin:
Tpelmann, 1963], p. xxix).
13)
Theodor Nldeke, Grammatik der neusyrischen Sprache am Urmia-See und in Kurdistan
(Leipzig: T.O. Weigel, 1868), p. 213; Hezy Mutzafi, Features of the Verbal System in the
Christian Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Koy Sanjaq and Their Areal Parallels, JAOS 124 (2004),
p. 252, n. 8.
14)
Georey Khan, in his treatment of the dialect of Qaraqosh, argues that the /i/ vowel of
muCCiC replaced the /a/ vowel of muCCaC due to analogy with the preterite base of stem
I (the old Pe#al) (Khan, The Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Qaraqosh [Leiden: Brill, 2002], p. 94).
However, he does not address the origin of the /u/ vowel.

Edward M. Cook / Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

11

replacements took place relatively early in the history of Aramaic, as we

find them operative already in the earliest texts. This in itself must have
created a strong analogic pressure to do the same for the causative axis of the
paradigm.15
Contemporary with the spread of the Ct was, in some texts, the avoidance
of the causative passive voice altogether. A study by Charles Meehan shows
that in the Peshitta and the Palestinian Targums, Hebrew Hoph#als were
often translated by the corresponding Aramaic G (Pe#al) form, especially for
intransitive verbs of motion,16 not by the Ct (Ittaph#al). Nevertheless, Onqelos
and Jonathan usually used the Ittaph#al to translate the Hebrew Hoph#al,17
and in fact sometimes use it when the Hebrew text does not use its causative
passive at all (as in, for instance, "ittotab he settled (was caused to dwell) for
Hebrew wayyagor he sojourned in Tg.Onq Gen. 20.1).

15)
The present argument could be applied, mutatis mutandis, to the internal passive (DP)
of the D-stem (Pa#el) as well, but finite attestations of the DP stem during an era when
vowels were indicated in the orthography are lacking.
16)
Charles Meehan, Qal/Pe"al as the Passive of Hif"il/Af"el in Mishnaic Hebrew and Middle
Aramaic, in K. Jongeling et al. (eds.), Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic Syntax Presented to
Professor J. Hoftijzer (Leiden: Brill, 1991), pp. 112131. The insights of valency theory may
suggest why the Pe#al stem was sometimes used in lieu of the CP for such verbs. Intransitive
verbs of motion, in the Pe#al stem, are said to be monovalent, i.e., having only one argument
(the subject). The causative derivation increases the valency of such verbs by one, rendering
them bivalent (subject, object), but the passivization of the causative has the eect of
removing the added argument. In cases where the erstwhile causative subject is only a
weak participant in the discourse, a kind of semantic economy often favored the use of the
unmarked equivalent of the CP, namely the active Pe#al.
17)
Klaus Beyer, diering both from the traditional view and the view outlined above,
assumes a vocalization hoq
. .tel
. or oq
. .tel
. (presumably from original *huq.til) for the CP perfect
up to and including the period of Qumran Aramaic (bald nach Christi Geburt), after
which it fell out of use (Die aramischen Texte vom Toten Meer [Gttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1984], pp. 152, 467). He does not discuss or defend this vocalization. It may
be that the anomalous consonantal text of the CP form in Dan. 7.4 hqymt (from the root
qwm) influenced him in his view of the second syllable vowel, or he may be positing a
relationship with the Arabic CP stem, which also has a {ui} vocalism. In any case, he
understands forms like nos. 58, 1417 above as "o. hzt,
and the Biblical forms hytyt and
.
hytyw as, respectively, "tyat and "tw. The evidence cited above may be cited against Beyers
view as well as the traditional view. In any case, the last segment of the form "hzy"t
(no. 5
.
above) is most naturally interpreted as /-zay"it/, since aleph was used to mark morpheme
boundaries between adjacent vowels or diphthongs in Qumran Aramaic. If that segment
contained only one vowel, it is dicult to see why the aleph should have been written. In
my view, we should vocalize the form "ahzay"it,
I was caused to see.
.

12

Edward M. Cook / Aramaic Studies 8.12 (2010) 512

4. The Vocalism of the Ittaph#al

There may in fact be some trace of the Haph#al (if we may so call it) in the
vocalization of the Ittaph#al stem. If it is granted that the causative passive
vocalism {aa} at some point stood in contrast to causative active {ai}, then
the notion of passivity would begin to inhere in the short /a/ vowel of the
second syllable. As the Ct stem began to assume the passive functions of the
CP, it also assumed, by analogy, the passive marker /a/ in the final syllable.
The etymologically original vocalism of the Ct was evidently {hit + haCCiC} >
hittaCCiC, to judge by the Ct of final-yodh roots that resisted the encroachment
of the passive ending {CaC}; compare, for instance, the forms "ittaram they
were lifted up (Tg.Ezek 10.15), with the passive short /a/ vocalism, with "ittagli"
they were taken into exile (Tg.Jer 40.1), with the etymologically original short
/i/, retained in the vicinity of etymological /y/. Except for final-yodh roots, the
vocalism of the Ct stem is hittaCCaC. It is dicult to account for this vocalism
except by positing an analogical process based on the second short vowel /a/ of
the internal passive, which itself could not carry the passive meaning unless it
was the sole point of contrast with the active vocalism. This provides additional
evidence that literary Aramaic operated with a basic morphemic contrast of
active {ai} ~ passive {aa} in the causative axis of its verbal paradigm.
Edward M. Cook
Catholic University of America
emcook37@gmail.com