[Mesorah] Davar HaAveid vs. Davar HaAvud

[Joshua Meisner]

I don't understand your proof from 22:3; the chataf there, in addition to
the s'michus, implies that aveidas is a noun.

In the event that my transliteration scheme was unclear, I intended that
Ha-Aveid have a kamatz under the aleph, so that I'm not sure if we're
arguing between aveid/oveid.

Your classification of bateil as a stative verb rather than as a passive
participle seems to answer my latter question, though.

Thanks and Ch"S,

Josh

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Benjamin M. Kandel <bkandel at yu.edu> wrote:

> Davar ha-aveid is correct.  Aveid is a stative verb, and the Torah
> describes the lost object with a stative verb (although it is feminine -
> Devarim 22:3, "le-khol aveidat ahikha").  The active participle would be
> "oveid".
> Stative verbs describe states, not actions.  Other common examples of
> statives are "yashein", "ameil", "tamei", "kasher", "meit" (hollow root,
> or ayin-vav), "eid", "geir", "hasheikh" (as in "safeik hasheikha safeik
> aina hasheikha"), etc.  So "bateil be-shishim" means "nullified in sixty",
> even though the English equivalent does use the passive participle.
>
> Kol tuv and chag sameach
>
> Ben Kandel
>
> > I got into a discussion today over the proper conjugation of the latter
> > word
> > in one of the heterei melacha of ChoH"M.  I had always heard it called
> > Ha-Aveid, using the active participle ("an object being lost") but the
> > other
> > party insisted it should be Ha-Avud, using the passive participle ("a
> lost
> > object").
> >
> > Google produces sources of some authority that utilize both conjugations,
> > i.e., money that he is losing and money that he will have lost.  What is
> > the
> > origin of this difference?
> >
> > (Upon further consideration of the matter - and aided by the information
> > that I picked up from Gesenius and Wikipedia in writing this post - I'm
> > not
> > sure that I fully understand the distinction between these two parts of
> > speech.  When something is bateil b'shishim, does that mean that it is
> > continually actively being nullified, as opposed to being batul v'omeid?
> > If
> > so, why?)
> >
> > Thanks and Ch"S,
> >
> > Josh
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mesorah mailing list
> > Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org
> > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mesorah mailing list
> Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081013/90c86746/attachment-0009.htm>