Oldal 73 [73]
THE HEBREW LANGUAGE AND COMPARATIVE LINGUISTICS...
of suffixes, and the impossibility of inflection of adjectives. Komáromi Csipkés
was the only scholar to apply the structure of Hebrew grammar to Hungarian,
although naturally the entire work is a mixture of Latin and Hebrew gram¬
matical bases.* There were several features of Hebrew grammar already used
in contemporary Latin ars grammatica, such as the tripartite division of words:
nomen, verbum, particula; or the use of shoresh/radix, or the pronomen affixum
or nomen analogum utilized by the previous Hungarian grammars discussed
above, as well as by Komäromi Csipkés."
There are three direct points in this work where Komäromi Csipkes refers
to Hebrew practice:
a) “The description of place and time is made by fixing an “i” at the end of
the denominativa: as földi (terrenus), varosi (oppidanus), debreceni (debrecenius),
tegnapi (hesternus) etc. as in Hebrew.”“*
b) The other reference is the acronym Moshewekalebethan, which is referred
to in the prefixed case of broken prepositional particles in Hungarian.”
c) Thirdly, he also mentions the similar meaning of the definite article 7.
Komäromi Csipkes’ method of correlating Hebrew and Hungarian was not
just listing homonyms here, but analysing common features in grammar. First
of all, he mentioned the parallel changing of vowels of words by declination,”
although he notes that in Hungarian this change takes place only in the last
syllable of the root, while in Hebrew it happens in previous syllables as well."
Concerning conjugation, he mentions that, as in Hebrew, Hungarian conjuga¬
tion is also based on the root of the 3" person singular, and that suffixes are
15 KOMÁROMI CSIPKÉS, Hungaria Illustrata, 21, 38.
16 VLADÁR, Egy rendhagyó magyar grammatika, 17.
Interestingly, he did not use previous Hungarian grammars, though he mentioned that he had
once seen Szenczi Molnar’s, could not remember when and where. “neutrius opera uti potuerim;
nullius grammaticam inspexerim. Memini me olim obiter vidisse D. Molnaris Grammaticam;
sed ubi, quando non jam memini. Scriptum vero R.D. Stephani Gelei, hactenus mihi vidisse non
contigit, ...” KOMÁROMI CSIPKÉS, Hungaria Illustrata, 15-16.
KOMÁROMI CSIPKÉS, Hungaria Illustrata, pp. 32—33: "Denominativa notantia rationibus
circumstantiarum loci & temporis, guocungue modo; derivantur affixa sola vocali, i. ut Fóldi,
terrenus, varasi oppidanus, Debreceni, Debrecinus. Tegnapi, hesternus &c. Non secus apud
Hebraeos.”
VLADAR, Egy rendhagy6 magyar grammatika, 278-279, has misunderstood Komaromi’s refer¬
ence to this word. It does not refer to the acronym itself, but to the cases described under this
rubric (vocibus memorialibus) in Komaromi’s Hebrew grammar: KOMAROMI CsIPKES, Schola
Hebraica, 111.
“Mutatio vocalinum, ut non modicam in lingua Hebraea, creat difficultatem, ita et in Hungarica.”
KOMÁROMI CSIPKÉS, Hungaria Illustrata, 55.
51 Ibid., 57.
47
48
49
+7] +»