English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Passive diathesis in Ugaritic and Biblical Hebrew is expressed by four morphological categories: Qal passive stem, Niphal stem, Qal passive participle, and impersonal construction. The distribution and functions of these categories are not proportional at different stages of the development of these languages. This paper concentrates on the distribution of Qal passive and Niphal stems. In the language of Ugaritic poetry G passive is the prevailing category; in the language of Ugaritic prose both G passive and N-stem are used to express passivity. In the languages of Classical Biblical Hebrew prose there are examples of Qal passive and Niphal in the passive function, but the situation is essentially different from Ugaritic: in Hebrew the lexical overlap between these stems is broader, and Niphal can be used in impersonal passive constructions. In Late Biblical Hebrew Qal passive is practically out of use. In Qumran Hebrew the Qal passive forms are sporadically attested, apparently as an archaizing retention.

Passive Voice in Ugaritic and Biblical Hebrew in the Historical Linguistic Perspective