Note: I am re-reviewing last weeks Rashi which is similar in flavor to this weeks Rashi. This Rashi may be a bit technical for some students not familiar with Hebrew and I advise the such students to skip immediately to rule #4, Alignment.

Most people are aware that Hebrew verbs come from three-letter roots. Each root is conjugated in the 7 dimensions of person, gender,plurality, tense, activity, modality, and direct-object. For example the root Shin Mem Resh means to watch. The conjugations Shin-Mem-Resh-Tauv-Yud and Nun-Shin-Mem-Resh-Nun-Vav mean I watched and we were watched respectively.

The rules for Hebrew grammar are carefully described in many modern books and are well known. Rashi will sometimes comment when a verse is using a rare conjugation of an odd grammatical form.

When presenting grammatical Rashis my favorite reference is the appendix in volume 5 of the Ibn Shoshan dictionary. This very short appendix lists most conjugations.

The following words have the following conjugations and meanings: The first three examples come from verse Lv13-55 which we translate afterwards:
• HiQCoT is a causative gerund, using a 1-2-Hey form - table 9 in the Ibn Shoshan - and means corner. Hence HiQCoT means after it was cornered. Radack explains: When you sweep and dust you typically gather the debris in the corner so it can be easily discarded. Hence you cause it to be placed in the corner.
• XiLeC is a singular-3rd-person-past conjugation in the intensive (Piel) mode, following table 1 in the Ibn Shoshan. As explained in rule 2, meaning above, XiLeC means to yank.
• HiToACH is a passive gerund using a 1-vav-3 form - table 6 in the Ibn Shoshan - and means to cover (in this case to plaster.) Hence HiToACH means after it was plastered.
• HooCaBayS (Lv13-55a) means it was washed. In other words it has the same meaning as the passive. It does not have a standard conjugation belonging to any table. Radack and modern scholars notice similarities with the Hitpael, Hafal modes but these similarities are not 100%. My opinion is that Rashi did not believe it was necessary to classify every rare conjugational form. If the form did not resemble anything then Rashi suffices with discussing its meaning without classifying its conjugation. In other words, when Rashi compares HooCaBayS, it was washed, with HayASotH, it was done, it is only a comparison in passivity in meaning; it is intended to be a comparison in conjugational form.

Based on the above Rashi translates Lv14-43b as follows (the underlined words follow the above grammatical points:) And if the disease comes again, and break out in the house, after he has yanked away the stones, after he has cornered the house, and after it was plastered;

Advanced Rashi: My text of Rashi seems to say that HiQCoT is passive. But this does not make sense and is not consistent with any known form. It is not even consistent with the opinion brought down by the Radack that the root of HiQCoT is Kuph-Tzade-Ayin. Consequently I believe this to be a printing error. I believe Rashi only commented on HiToACH, XiLeC but that a later scribe inserted the word HiQCoT. The scribe errored because Rashi brought as an example HayASoth which resembles HiQCoT in that it begins with a hey. Such scribal transcription errors occur from time to time in Rashi. Rashi's main point was contrasting the active form of XiLeTZ - to yank - with the passive form of HiToACH - to be plastered.