I have always taught these as regular liquids, observing that at times a
preceeding vowel will ablaut (somewhat like compensatory lengthening in
Hebrew). Are there particular linguistic reasons for avoiding such an
explanation? Perhaps this is a generalization and oversimplification, but
from the beginning student's perspective, seems adequate--or amy I missing
something crucial here?
As I've (briefly) browsed the liquids, I see that -E- forms are certainly
the most frequent such formulations, but that are others which, by using
ablaut in my explanation, I don't have to explain separately:
GAMEW > EGHMA (though it also has a first aor. form, EGAMHSA)
KERDAINW > EKERDANA (also with a first aorist EKERDHSA)
KAQAIRW > EKAQARA
BASKAINW > EBASKANA
EUFRAINW > HUFRANA (and quite a few other -AINW verbs)
Rod
_________________________________________________________________
Rodney J. Decker Baptist Bible Seminary
Asst. Prof./NT P O Box 800
rdecker@bbc.edu Clarks Summit PA 18411
http://www.bbc.edu/courses/BBS/RDecker/Index.htm USA
_________________________________________________________________