BBH Chapter 33 — Pual Weak Verbs (פֻּעַל)

Files

Exercises

Flashcards

Notebooks

Basics of Biblical Hebrew, Pratico & Van Pelt, Chapter 33

Scope: This chapter extends the Pual paradigm (Ch32) to weak-root classes. The Pual is the
passive counterpart of the Piel (Ch30–31). Its diagnostic signature — Qibbuts (ֻ) under R1
+ Dagesh Forte in R2 — is preserved in every weak class, though weak roots force predictable
phonological adjustments in how that signature is realized. Functions (passive of the Piel:
intensive-passive, factitive-passive, declarative-passive, simple passive) were covered in Ch32
and are not repeated here.

1. The Eight Weak Classes — Overview

Key principle: The Pual's Qibbuts-under-R1 + Dagesh-in-R2 signature is robust across all
weak classes. What the weak root changes is how those markers are hosted — gutturals cannot
take a dagesh, I-י and I-נ roots keep their first consonant rather than losing it (as they do
in the Qal), and III-ה roots contract their final ה into the ending. Recognize the Qibbuts and
virtual or actual dagesh; the root class will follow.

2. I-guttural (Pe-Guttural) Verbs

Pattern

The Pual strong perfect places Qibbuts (ֻ) under R1 and Dagesh Forte in R2. When R1 is a
guttural (א, ע, ח, ה), the Qibbuts remains but the guttural cannot take vocal shewa; it
takes a composite shewa (typically hateph-patach for ע and ח). Because the guttural also
refuses the Dagesh Forte in R2, compensatory lengthening occurs: the Qibbuts under R1
lengthens to Shureq, or the short vowel before R2 lengthens. The resulting form loses the
visible dagesh in R2 but the Qibbuts (or its lengthened reflex) under R1 still identifies
the Pual.

Diagnostic markers:
- Perfect 3ms: עֻבַּד (hypothetical from עבד) — composite shewa under guttural; no
dagesh in R2; Patach under R2 (lengthened reflex)
- For the root ענה (both I-ע and III-ה): עֻנָּה (was humbled/afflicted) — I-guttural effect
(composite shewa under ע replaces vocal shewa) + III-ה contracted ending
- The practical result: when you see Qibbuts under a guttural R1 with no dagesh in R2,
suspect I-guttural Pual with compensatory lengthening

Diagnostic markers (summary):
- R1 = guttural: composite shewa (hateph-patach or hateph-seghol) rather than plain vocal shewa
- R2: no dagesh forte; vowel is patach or tsere (compensatory lengthening)
- Qibbuts under R1: still present (or lengthened to Shureq when R1 is א)

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

Note: ענה is simultaneously I-guttural and III-ה, so its Pual forms show both adjustments.
A pure I-guttural (e.g., עמד) is very rare in the Pual; ענה Pual is the most commonly
cited example of I-guttural behavior in this stem.

Key Corpus Examples

• עֻנָּה (Lam 5:5; Isa 53:7) — from ענה — "was afflicted/humbled" — Pual Perfect 3ms;
  Qibbuts under I-guttural ע + contracted III-ה ending ָּה; the compound weak-root behavior
  is on full display
• מְעֻנֶּה (Isa 53:4) — "smitten/afflicted" — Pual Participle ms; מְ prefix + Qibbuts under
  ע + no dagesh (guttural) + seghol + ה (III-ה contracted participle ending)

3. III-ח/ע (Lamed-Guttural) Verbs

Pattern

When R3 is ח or ע, the guttural demands an a-class vowel in its syllable and triggers
patach furtive in open final position. In the Pual, the Qibbuts under R1 and Dagesh in R2
are fully intact (the weak root is at R3, not R1). The only change from the strong Pual is
the behavior of the final syllable: the characteristic vowel before the final guttural
shifts from seghol toward patach, and patach furtive appears in the 3ms perfect, imperfect,
and participle when the final syllable is open and stressed.

Diagnostic markers:
- Perfect 3ms: קֻטַּח (hypothetical) — Qibbuts under R1 + dagesh in R2 + patach furtive
before final ח/ע
- The Qibbuts + dagesh is identical to the strong Pual; patach furtive is the only addition
- When a suffix follows (e.g., 1cs קֻטַּחְתִּי), patach furtive does not appear (guttural now
in closed syllable)

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

Note: The patach furtive is a pronunciation feature (pronounced before the guttural) that
appears in the pointing; the dagesh in R2 is unaffected since R3 is the weak letter.

Key Corpus Examples

• שֻׁלַּח (Isa 16:2) — from שלח — "was sent away / was released" — Pual Perfect 3ms; Qibbuts
  under שׁ + dagesh in ל; the Pual passive of the common Piel "send away"
• מְשֻׁלָּח (Gen 49:21) — from שלח — "set free" — Pual Participle ms; מְ prefix + Qibbuts + dagesh
  in ל; Naphtali described as "a swift deer, one who bears beautiful fawns"

4. III-א (Lamed-Aleph) Verbs

Pattern

Final א quiesces (becomes silent) in word-final position, and the vowel that precedes it
lengthens compensatorily. In the Pual, the Qibbuts under R1 and Dagesh Forte in R2 are
intact. The only change: the final vowel of the form (which in the strong Pual is a short
patach or seghol) lengthens before the silent א. The א is still written but not pronounced.

Diagnostic markers:
- Perfect 3ms: קֻטָּא (hypothetical) — Qibbuts under R1 + dagesh in R2 + lengthened vowel
(qamets or tsere) + silent final א
- The strong Pual 3ms קֻטַּל ends in short patach + ל; the III-א Pual 3ms ends in qamets
or tsere + silent א
- When suffixes follow, the א is in a closed syllable and the compensatory lengthening
does not occur

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

Key Corpus Examples

• קֹרָא (various) — note that the Pual of קרא is rare; most Pual Participle forms of III-א
  roots closely resemble Niphal forms and require context to distinguish. The Qibbuts under
  R1 and the dagesh in R2 (before the silent א) are the decisive distinguishers from Niphal
  Participle (נִקְרָא).

5. III-ה (Lamed-He) Verbs

Pattern

III-ה roots have a final ה that functions as a vowel letter (mater lectionis), not a true
consonant. In the Pual, this produces contracted endings throughout the paradigm — the final
ה merges with the inflectional ending rather than appearing as a separate consonant. The
Qibbuts under R1 and Dagesh Forte in R2 are fully intact. The R2 dagesh is often written
as a dagesh forte in the doubled consonant: צֻוָּה (צוה), גֻּלָּה (גלה), כֻּסָּה (כסה).

Diagnostic markers:
- Perfect 3ms: צֻוָּה — Qibbuts under R1 (צ) + Dagesh Forte in R2 (וּ written as שׁוּרֶק
in III-ה roots where R2 = ו) + contracted ָּה ending
- Perfect 3cp: צֻוּוּ — Qibbuts under R1 + contracted 3cp ending
- Perfect 1cs: צֻוֵּיתִי — Qibbuts under R1 + contracted 1cs ending with תִּי
- Imperfect 3ms: יְצֻוֶּה — shewa under יְ (Pual Imperfect prefix) + Qibbuts under R1
+ contracted ה ending with seghol
- Participle ms: מְצֻוֶּה — מְ prefix + Qibbuts + contracted ה ending

Special note on צוה: The root צוה has R2 = ו. In the Pual, the Dagesh Forte that normally
appears in R2 cannot be written in ו (since ו takes a vowel letter). Instead, the ו receives
a Shureq (וּ) which functions as the combined Dagesh + vowel. This is the same phenomenon seen
in the Piel of צוה (צִוָּה) — the Shureq in R2 is the diagnostic marker.

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

Key Corpus Examples

• צֻוָּה (Gen 45:19; Lev 8:35 context) — from צוה — "was commanded" — Pual Perfect 3ms;
  Qibbuts under צ + Shureq in R2 (ו) + contracted ָּה ending; the passive of the
  ubiquitous Piel command verb
• צֻוֵּיתִי (Lev 8:35) — "I was commanded" — Pual Perfect 1cs; Moses speaks: "just as I
  was commanded (צֻוֵּיתִי)" — Qibbuts under צ + tsere-yod contracted 1cs ending
• צֻוֵּיתֶם (Num 36:2 context) — "you (mp) were commanded" — Pual Perfect 2mp; same
  Qibbuts + tsere-yod root pattern + תֶּם ending
• גֻּלָּה (2 Kgs 17:23; Amos 1:5) — from גלה — "was carried into exile / was uncovered" —
  Pual Perfect 3ms; Qibbuts under ג + dagesh in ל + contracted ָּה
• גֻּלּוּ (2 Kgs 17:6; Isa 5:13) — from גלה — "were carried into exile" — Pual Perfect 3cp
• כֻּסָּה (Gen 7:19; Exo 24:15) — from כסה — "was covered" — Pual Perfect 3ms; Qibbuts under
  כ + dagesh in ס + contracted ָּה
• עֻנָּה (Lam 1:5; Isa 53:7) — from ענה — "was afflicted/humbled" — Pual Perfect 3ms (also
  demonstrates I-guttural + III-ה double-weak behavior)

6. I-נ (Pe-Nun) Verbs

Pattern

A critical contrast with the Qal: in the Qal Imperfect, the root נ of I-נ verbs
assimilates into R2 (יִתֵּן from נתן — the נ disappears into the dagesh of ת). In the
Pual, by contrast, the נ does not assimilate. R1 = נ takes the Qibbuts normally,
and R2 takes the Dagesh Forte as in any strong Pual. The Pual of נתן therefore looks
exactly like a strong Pual with נ as R1:

• Pual Perfect 3ms: נֻתַּן (was given)
• Pual Perfect 3cp: נֻתְּנוּ (were given, Num 3:9)
• Pual Participle mp: נְתֻנִים (given ones — note the shift: in the participle, the
  מְ prefix becomes נְ because the root's own נ serves as R1, and the Qibbuts shifts
  into the second syllable)

Why no assimilation? In the Qal Imperfect, the נ is in onset position before R2 with
only a vowelless junction — the assimilation environment exists. In the Pual, the נ bears
the Qibbuts vowel as R1; it is a fully voweled consonant in the syllable onset and has no
assimilation environment.

Participle note: The Pual Participle ms of נתן is נָתוּן (a common frozen form, "given,
assigned") or מְנֻתָּן (the regular participle). The construct plural נְתֻנִים in Num 3:9
and Num 8:16 is a particularly common fixed form.

Diagnostic markers:
- Perfect 3ms: נֻתַּן — Qibbuts under נ + Dagesh in ת + short patach
- Perfect 3cp: נֻתְּנוּ — Qibbuts under נ + Dagesh in ת + vocal shewa before נוּ
- Participle mp construct: נְתֻנִים — נְ initial consonant with vocal shewa (the מְ
prefix is absent because the root's own נ fills the R1 slot); Qibbuts in second syllable
under ת

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

Key Corpus Examples

• נֻתַּן (Gen 38:14; Lev 11:38 and many more) — from נתן — "was given" — Pual Perfect 3ms;
  one of the most frequent Pual forms in the OT; Qibbuts under נ + dagesh in ת unmistakably
  passive of נָתַן
• נֻתְּנוּ (Num 3:9; Num 8:16) — "they were given / they are assigned" — Pual Perfect 3cp;
  the Levites described as "wholly given (נְתֻנִים נְתֻנִים) to Aaron and his sons"
• נְתֻנִים (Num 3:9; 8:16) — "given ones / those assigned" — Pual Participle mp; a technical
  term for the Levites' status; Qibbuts in the second syllable (נְ + תֻ) is the key marker
• נָתוּן (Josh 2:24; Deut 19:12 context) — frozen Pual Participle ms of נתן — "given [into
  the hand of]"; this participial form appears frequently in transfer-of-agency formulas

7. I-י (Pe-Yod) Verbs

Pattern

A second critical contrast with the Qal: in the Qal Imperfect, I-י roots drop the י
(יֵלֵד → יֵלֶד; יִלֵּד is Piel). In the Pual, the י of R1 stays. It takes the
Qibbuts just as any strong R1 would, and R2 takes the Dagesh Forte. The I-י Pual forms
therefore look exactly like strong Pual forms with י as R1:

• Pual Perfect 3ms: יֻלַּד (was born/begotten)
• Pual Perfect 3cp: יֻלְּדוּ (were born)
• Pual Imperfect 3ms: יְיֻלַּד (rare; context determines)

Why does the י stay? In the Pual, the Qibbuts vowel is fixed under R1 by the stem
morphology. The Qal Imperfect drops the י because it stands in a vowelless (or e-class)
prefix environment that creates a quiescence context; in the Pual, the Qibbuts is a full
vowel under R1 and prevents quiescence.

Diagnostic markers:
- Perfect 3ms: יֻלַּד — Qibbuts under י + Dagesh Forte in ל + short patach; looks like
a strong Pual with root י-ל-ד
- Perfect 3cp: יֻלְּדוּ — Qibbuts under י + vocal shewa under ל before דוּ suffix
- The form is entirely parallel to the strong Pual; the only "weakness" is the uncommon
sight of Qibbuts under י

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

Key Corpus Examples

• יֻלַּד (Gen 4:18 [×4]; 4:26; 10:1, 21, 25; 11:10–26 [repeatedly]; 46:22 and many more) —
  from ילד — "was born / was begotten" — Pual Perfect 3ms; by far the most common I-י Pual
  form in the OT; the genealogies of Genesis use this form with remarkable density. Gen 4:18
  alone lists Irad, Mehujael, Methushael, and Lamech each introduced by וְיֻלַּד or a parallel
  construction
• יֻלְּדוּ (Gen 46:22) — "who were born to Rachel" — Pual Perfect 3cp; the genealogy of Jacob's
  sons counts Rachel's children with this form
• יֻלַּד (Gen 4:26) — "to Seth also a son was born" — Pual Perfect 3ms; וּלְשֵׁת גַּם־הוּא
  יֻלַּד בֵּן; the newborn is named Enosh
• מְיֻלָּד (hypothetical form; the common participial expression for "born of / native-born"
  is typically אֶזְרָח, but the Pual participle of ילד does occur in late or poetic texts)

8. Biconsonantal (II-י/ו) Verbs

Pattern

Biconsonantal roots in the Pual are rare. The root's medial vowel letter (ו or י as R2)
creates tension with the Pual's required Dagesh Forte in R2 — a vowel letter cannot receive
a dagesh. The practical result: the few attested Pual forms of Biconsonantal roots either
show compensatory lengthening (Qibbuts under R1 lengthens toward Shureq) or the forms are
simply not attested in the Pual and the root uses a periphrastic or Niphal passive instead.

Key point for the classroom: Students should be aware that Biconsonantal roots rarely
appear as Pual in the OT. When a Biconsonantal root must express a passive idea, Biblical
Hebrew typically uses the Hophal (for Hiphil causatives) or the Niphal. The Pual of
Biconsonantal roots is a theoretical category with minimal corpus evidence.

Diagnostic markers (if encountered):
- Qibbuts under R1 (no dagesh in R2 possible; compensatory lengthening instead)
- The form will look similar to a Hophal or Niphal; root identification and lexical context
are decisive

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

The table above is theoretical. In practice, when encountering a form that might be a
Biconsonantal Pual, verify by lexicon. The Hophal (הוּקַם from קום) and Niphal (נָקוּם) are
the attested passives for Biconsonantal roots in most cases.

Key Corpus Examples

Given the rarity, no standard corpus examples are provided. When students encounter a
Biconsonantal Pual candidate in reading, the strategy is: (1) confirm the Qibbuts under R1,
(2) note absence of dagesh in R2, (3) check the lexicon for whether this root has a Pual.

9. Geminate (Ayin-Doubled, II=III) Verbs

Pattern

Geminate roots (R2 = R3) in the Pual double the repeated consonant: the Dagesh Forte that
the Pual requires in R2 is the same dagesh that geminates produce when they contract. The
Qibbuts under R1 is fully intact. The resulting forms are compact and distinctive:

• Pual Perfect 3ms: קֻלַּל (was cursed), הֻלַּל (was praised)
• The form shows: Qibbuts under R1 + strong (geminate) Dagesh in the single consonant that
  represents R2/R3 + patach

Diagnostic markers:
- Perfect 3ms: קֻלַּל — Qibbuts under R1 + single doubled consonant (R2=R3) with dagesh
+ patach; the root has only two distinct consonants visible in the contracted form (ק + ל)
- Participle ms: מְקֻלָּל — מְ prefix + Qibbuts + doubled consonant with dagesh + qamets
- The contracted geminate root + Qibbuts makes these forms compact and easy to spot once
the pattern is recognized

Paradigm Summary (3ms per conjugation)

Key Corpus Examples

• קֻלַּל (Num 22:6) — from קלל — "let him be cursed" — Pual Imperfect (jussive) 3ms in the
  request of Balak: "I know that whoever you bless is blessed, and whoever you curse is cursed
  (יְקֻלָּל)" — the Pual of קלל appears in the same verse as the Pual of ברך, making Num 22:6
  a showcase passage for Pual forms
• הֻלַּל (Psa 113:3; Mal 1:11) — from הלל — "was praised / let him be praised" — the passive
  of the ubiquitous Piel הִלֵּל ("praised"); Pual Imperfect 3ms יְהֻלַּל appears in the Psalms
  doxologies

10. High-Frequency Weak Pual Lemmas

The following roots are the most commonly attested weak-class Pual lemmas in the OT. Because
the Pual is inherently less frequent than the Piel (passive is less common than active in
narrative), these counts are modest but the forms appear regularly in Torah, Psalms, and
prophetic literature.

Special note on ברך (bless): The root ברך has R2 = ר. The ר is technically not a
guttural in the full sense (it does not take composite shewa), but it does refuse Dagesh
Forte in most contexts. In the Pual of ברך, the Dagesh that should appear in ר is
replaced by compensatory lengthening: the Qibbuts under R1 (בּ) lengthens to a Shureq,
or more commonly the vowel of R2 shifts. The standard Pual Participle ms is מְבֹרָךְ
(with Holem-Vav in R2 position rather than Qibbuts + Dagesh) and the Pual Imperfect 3ms
is יְבֹרַךְ (with Holem-Vav + Patach). These forms appear in:
- Psa 72:17: יְבֹרַךְ בּוֹ — "may he be blessed through him" — Pual Impf. 3ms of ברך
- Gen 14:19: בָּרוּךְ אַבְרָם — note: בָּרוּךְ is the Qal Passive Participle; contrast with
מְבֹרָךְ (Pual Ptc.) which appears in Gen 14:20 (בָּרוּךְ אֵל עֶלְיוֹן) — context
distinguishes; both carry the semantic field of blessing
- Gen 24:31: בֹּא בְּרוּךְ יְהוָה — Qal Passive Participle; the Pual מְבֹרָךְ appears in
Psa 72:17 and Num 22:6 context (יְבֹרַךְ as Imperfect)

Sources: MACULA Hebrew WLC (Clear Bible, CC BY 4.0) · BBH = Pratico & Van Pelt, Basics of Biblical Hebrew, 3rd ed.