Selected quad for the lemma: son_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
son_n	brother_n	father_n	sister_n	23,792	5	10.2345	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A58099	A discovrse of the orientall tongves viz. [brace ] Ebrew, Samaritan, Calde, Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic : together with A genrall grammer for the said tongues / by Christian Ravis.	Raue, Christian, 1613-1677.	1649 (1649)	Wing R311; ESTC R32273	174,955	268

Order by all the forgoing Authors the fourth conjugation ' is to have the active signification and reciprocall and yet we finde many places of Scripture where it is the passive nay the reciprocall signification is that which is both active and passive as I love my selfe there I am the same man that loves and is beloved so that in this forme the Arabians looke more for the passive signification then the active using it almost constantly for the passive and notwithstanding all this it hath the second person of the present commanding or the imperative in singular and plurall not onely in Ebrue but also in Calde Syriac Arabic and Etiopic Whence it is clear and evident that that exception of the Ebrue Grammarians that only Pual and Hofal as they call the second and fourth Order because pasive have no imperative is false I warrant you if nifal hitpaelitpeal and itpael in Ebrue Calde and Syric and tefaal in Arabic may have the present commanding being passive then pual and Hofal may have it to In the Nounes there is not that diversity introduced by the Grammarians notwithstanding in all tongues the Nounes appellative or substantive are of divers sorts 1. The ability of the act to write or drinke 2. The act it selfe Writing or drinking 3. The actor writer drinker 4. The abstraction of the act drunkennesse and by Analogy writnesse 5. The instrument wherewith is acted ink drinke 6. The place appointed or accustomary to the action whereunto in English for the most part is added house place room yet in some words the very latine termination of it is taken as Oratorium and Oratory auditorium an auditory so by Analogy printery writery drinkery 7. The inclination in a person drunkard sluggard by Analogy writard or with a circunscription by adding the word Master whoremaster c. 8. The abstraction of that inclination as wee say hardnesse so drunkardnesse sluggardnesse writhardnesse 9. Speciall Man Woman Husband Wife Father Mother Brother Sister Son Daughter Child c. 10. individuall Adam Havva Qayin Hebel Sêt Enós Ada Zilla Lemek c. Now as all these are in many tongues clearly distinguished by divers formes so were it well if our Grammarians or the Jewes had done so but because they have not done it therefore it followes not that wee must leave it undon And yet if this tongue doth not afford a cleare distinction of forms by this or that Letter and Vowell unto every sort as wee see other tongues do not why should wee than be so mightily vexed with neere 350 or 400 formes of Nounes the greatest part whereof are set down by Qimhi in his Miklôl the rest by others as well Jewes as Christians or at least with those 311. formes or severall scapes of dwelling-houses of the Nounes which are divided into 26 streets by Abraham de Balmes p. h. 8. li. 25. 28. when these things are meerly superfluous if they do not so much as distinguishe unto us 10 or 12 sorts of severall accidents of a signification of the root except to do that whereunto hee leades us by his Motto which doth comprehend the number of 311 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is seven times in the Bible to set all these 26 streets and 311 Houses on a lusty huge great fire as the name of the Lord in little lesse than a blasphemy is taken by these Jewes to inlarge and amplify a thing by and to make a good fire at the victory of such a terrible enemy The speciall Analogy in Ebrue is to be observed in these following joynts 1. Qamez the long a is for the most part found in the Noune of the first Order under the first Radicall as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the second of the whole first preter tense without or with the affix letters of the personall Nounes as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These are the examples of the first preter with qamez when they receave the personall Nouns by their letters onely wherein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have a long qamez a as all other persons in that first preter without the affixes but with the affixes they yeeld constantly no qamez and therefore left it away except 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has a qamez a in any person but that comes not within the compasse of the first second or third Radicall Except where the second radicall hath a kholem there it turnes into a short qamez o because the mediator doth fly from the second to the third As for instance under the second radicall k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the preter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yakôl we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ex. 18.23 vyacolta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Esa 13.5 the reason of that changing of the o long in a short o I give because the mediator accent doth leave the Vowell and in the manuall concordance in Ebrue it will be plainly seene whither a verbe hath really or is capable to have the kholem at the second radicall which is easily seene if it have kholem in any Person number Tense Order and Gender at least in one place for then it may have it in all places 2. This long qamez is in the whole first preter without affixes as yee see in the paradigme 3. The same in nifal the seventh present and future under the first radicall as is also to be seene by the paradigme 4. Under almost any letter following 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and frequently following 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you partly see by the paradigme in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And an abundance of such examples through the whole paradigma Zere a long e 1. Under the second radicall of whatsoever verbe conjugation or order tense person number and gender For what I sayd of qamez and of kholem the same I say of zere If yee finde onely one example among a hundert in the Bible through all the orders c. which hath a zere that is warrant enough to admit it in all the rest of the places and persons if it please you for this liberty is used in all the rest of the Dialects so that yee need not feare to wrong the tongue and good reason for it such a foundation being layd by God in nature for a variety of pronunciation of every tongue not onely of tongues 5.6 700 or a 1000 miles distant from each other but even in every tongue insomuch that there is not one tongue under the Sun that doth not change within every 20 miles I confesse insensible but sensible within 40 or 50 and odde miles which holdes also in this Orientall tongue whence it is that this primitife mother tongue to whole Africa and a fifth part of Asia being but one and the same and seeing that the greatest changing and alteration of the sound besides the letters being in the vowells and that within so narrow a compasse viz. onely five a e i o u

inundations of the Turkes or Sarazens it came to ruine having been a stranger there for about 7 or 800. yeares Seventeenthly A tongue that rises in a country and casts out a knowne strange to gue is the true native tongue though formerly unknowne Hierome in the Proem upon the second booke of his comment upon the Galatians sayes that part of Arabia which must needs have had the Arabic tongue spake Greek hence it followes that Arabic was the vulgar speech thereof as Syriac of Syria Eighteenthly Diversitie of a climate mingling with strangers and tract of time may doe much to change a tongue It is not the confusion of Babell and the punishment of the Sinar rebels that is hereditary unto us in the multiplicity of speech as Adams corruptions are but those three things I set downe in the proposition For had there never been a confusion at Babel this multiplicity of tongues would have been The Scripture Calde paraphrasts Sibyls and all speake of one tongue not many No man will deny that there is a multitude now but whither from Babel or not is the question which I determine negatively It is but not from Babel Nor is Augustines reason right pro peccato dissensionis humanae for the sin of man disagreeing not only different dispositions but different tongues came into the world For Cayin and Habel or Hebel disagreed but there was no such punishment and so by degrees this disagreement grew hotter and hotter insomuch that in 1656. yeares there grew such a fierce fire that all the water in the world much lesse a confusion of their tongues but the whole cataracts from heaven must breake out to quench it Nay there was rather a contrary nature in those at Babel for before the deluge they could not agree but after it they conspired to bee together in one place Cum quisque principatum rapit when every one would govern as Austin thinks was rather before the deluge then after it for it is without warrant of Scripture for there it is not said that every one did strive at Babel for dominion Nor was it as Abidenus did conceive to make them a way unto heaven a childish conceit Nor for feare of another perhaps ensuing deluge as Josephus L. 1. de Ant. Iud. ca. 2. thinkes Nor for feare of the consumption of the world by fire Nor upon that false reason of their certaine agreement for Idolatry which the Jerusalem translation holds forth by the phrase of preparing an everlasting name a phrase too common in all languages to be here understood for that fearfull name of God Almighty as is to be seen in the 2 Sam. 18 13. Es 63 12. 14. Jer. 32 20. Dan. 9 15. Nor because they feared a confusion or dispersion to come but because they would live altogether in one Kingdome and set up at Sinear the Residence for their King and get for themselves an everlasting name which being against the counsell of God who would have them to fill the earth here and there he did disperse them with that temporary variety of pronunciations whereby they were not able to understand one another though the tongue remained one and the same no new tongues then coyned no new languages then on a suddaine arising the variety of their pronunciation being abundantly sufficient to disperse them which was the intention of God One tongue being before the confusion of Babel one in it and one after it For the Ebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shafah signifies a lip is contradistinct in Genesis 11 1. to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dbatim words This is the matter and the forme The tongue speakes the lip formes it Yet these two organs in our mouth are contradistinct for the tongue is not the lip nor the lip the tongue and the tongue letters are different from the lip letters as all Ebrew Grammarians shew and so they are also opposed Psal 12.4 Who have said with our tongue will we prevaile our lips are our owne who is Lord over us and Ps 140 3. 1 Corin. 14 21. We have but one tongue though two lips one tongue but divers pronunciations And the scripture tels us that God did not confound the tongue lesse tongues but the lips the instrument forming the pronunciation not of coyning words Abydenus by Eusebius and Cyrillus expressely oppose these things also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon those which hitherto had beene of one tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there was cast upon them a variety of sound or pronunciation And the Sibylla by Josephus speakes onely of the pronunciation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when all men had but one sound or pronunciation they built a Tower so that in our English the translation should run thus Further the whole earth was of one pronunctation and that of the same words 2. Therefore came it to passe c. If this be rightly and I thinke it is by me considered I am sure no man will think that I have rondered the least word contrary to the mind of the holy Ghost in the Scripture and many false suppositions being thereby taken away will make an end of many endlesse questions about the escape of the Ebrew as when where and how confounded or lost Nay these three reasons have beene briefly touched by that worthy and learned author Edward Brerewood in his enquiries touching the diversities of languages in two places first page 51. The Punic tongue seemeth to me out of question to have bin the Cnaanitish or old Ebrew language though I doubt not somewhat altered from the Originall pronunciation as is wont 1 in tract of time to befall 2 Colonyes planted 3 among strangers farre from home Againe pag. 57. And certainly touching the difference that was betweene the Ebrew and the Punic I make no doubt but 1 their great distance from their primitive habitation and 2 their conversation with strangers among whom they were planted and 3 together with both the length of time which is wont to bring alteration to all the languages in the world were the causes of it Nineteenthly The Ebrews and Ebrew tongue are not denominated from Eber. The text Gen. 10 21. translated runnes thus Concerning Sem born to be the Grandfather of all the progeny beyond the River brother of Yaset the Elder 22. The sons of Sem were Elam and Assur and Arfacsad and Lud and Aram. 23. But the sonnes of Aram Uz and Khus and Geter and Mas. 24. But Arfacsad begat Salakh and Selakh begat that Eber. 25. But to Eber was borne a twinling of sonnes the name of the first was Feleg division because in his dayes niflega there was divided the whole earth but the name of his brother was Joqthan the little one Upon this place have the Jewes constantly built the title of their name and tongue but in my weak judgment without reason Nay Abraham in Gen. 14 13. is also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haibrai the stranger from beyond the River Frat