לֶהֱוֵא · יוּכַל · תְּקוּם
ORIGINALBA-014
Biblical Aramaic · Peal and Other Action-Word Patterns
Peal imperfect family
BA-014Biblical AramaicAramaic of Daniel and Ezra
ORIGINAL LANGUAGE FIRST
לֶהֱוֵא · יוּכַל · תְּקוּם
Pedagogical transliterationleheve · yukhal · tequm
Plain meaningmay it be · he can · it will stand
Pointing follows Miqra according to the Masorah (MAM). Cantillation is omitted on the lesson card for visual focus; the underlying evidence retains the complete source reading. Transliterations are pedagogical aids, not replacements for the source.WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT
Peal imperfect family
Biblical Aramaic imperfect forms do not map to one English tense. לֶהֱוֵא in a blessing is jussive-like, ‘may it be.’ יוּכַל expresses ability, ‘he can.’ תְּקוּם predicts that a feminine singular kingdom ‘will stand.’ The prefixes help identify person; clause context supplies the English force.
HEAR THIS LESSONListen to the full public explanation.Teacher narration is separate from original-language pronunciation.
Audio settings
SEE HOW IT WORKS
Keep the form, reading, and meaning together.
leheve · yukhal · tequm
READINGPedagogical reading guide
may it be · he can · it will stand
MEANINGBiblical Aramaic
לֶהֱוֵא = Peal imperfect 3ms in a wish · יוּכַל = Peal imperfect 3ms, ability · תְּקוּם = Peal imperfect 3fs, future prediction
EXAMPLES
Examples supplied by the approved curriculum.
Daniel 2:20 — לֶהֱוֵא שְׁמֵהּ — ‘may his name be’ · Daniel 2:10 — יוּכַל לְהַחֲוָיָה — ‘can declare’ · Daniel 2:44 — וְהִיא תְּקוּם — ‘and it will stand’
SOURCE REFERENCE
Daniel 2:10; 2:20; 2:44
APPROVED STUDY LAYERS
Source-specific guidance from the curriculum.
Learning objective
Recognize Peal imperfect prefixes and let syntax determine whether English expresses future, modality, or a wish.
Morphology and syntax
OSHB: לֶהֱוֵא AVqi3ms; יוּכַל AVqi3ms; תְּקוּם AVqi3fs.
Dialect boundary
Biblical Aramaic of Daniel and Ezra. Later Targumic, Jewish Babylonian, and Zoharic forms are not imported into this lesson.
Practice
Parse the person/gender of each form and describe its contextual force. Why should all three not simply be labeled ‘future’?
Answer key
לֶהֱוֵא 3ms with wish/jussive force; יוּכַל 3ms modal ability; תְּקוּם 3fs future prediction. Their morphology belongs to the imperfect family, but syntax and context differ.
Source notes
MAM and OSHB agree on these forms; OSHB supplies the independent person analysis.
REMEMBER