Archaic or greatly restricted in usage by Middle Egyptian. The perfect has mostly taken over the functions of the perfective, and the subjunctive and periphrastic prospective have mostly replaced the prospective.
Declines using third-person suffix pronouns instead of adjectival endings: masculine .f/.fj, feminine .s/.sj, dual .sn/.snj, plural .sn.
Compare Arabicحَسَبَ(ḥasaba, “to calculate, to count”), Hebrewחָשַׁב(ḥāšaḇ, “to think”), and Classical Syriacܚܫܒ(“to think, to count, to calculate”). Alternatively identical in origin to the above word (‘to break apart’, etc.) by metaphorical extension; see the usage note below.
It has been hypothesized that the calculation operations represented by ḥsb are distinct from those represented by jp in that ḥsb prototypically expresses reckoning by means of repeatedly breaking into halves, while jp prototypically expresses reckoning by means of counting operations.[1]
Archaic or greatly restricted in usage by Middle Egyptian. The perfect has mostly taken over the functions of the perfective, and the subjunctive and periphrastic prospective have mostly replaced the prospective.
Declines using third-person suffix pronouns instead of adjectival endings: masculine .f/.fj, feminine .s/.sj, dual .sn/.snj, plural .sn.
Palma, Helena Lopez (2015) “Egyptian Fractional Numerals: The grammar of Egyptian NPs and statements with fractional number expressions” in Lingua Aegyptia, volume 23, pages 197–228
^ Palma, Helena Lopez (2015) “Egyptian Fractional Numerals: The grammar of Egyptian NPs and statements with fractional number expressions” in Lingua Aegyptia, volume 23, page 199, note 4