Derived stems (also calledD stems) are amorphological feature ofverbs common to theSemitic languages. These derived verb stems are sometimes calledaugmentations orforms of the verb, or are identified by theirHebrew namebinyan (literally meaning "construction"), and sometimes correspond with additional semantic meaning such as passive or causative action.

Semitic languages make extensive use ofnonconcatenative morphology, and most words share a set of two, three or four consonants^[1] which comprise aroot^[2] wherein each root may be the basis for a number of conceptually related words. Traditionally, words are thought of as being derived from these root consonants, but a view increasingly held by contemporary linguists sees stem words being the source of derivations rather than consonantal roots.^[2] Regardless, each language features a number of set patterns for deriving verb stems from a given root or underived stem. Stems sharing the same root consonants represent separate verbs, albeit often semantically related, and each is the basis for its ownconjugational paradigm. As a result, these derived stems are considered part of the system ofmorphological derivation, and notconjugation orinflection.

Typically, one stem is associated with the ordinary simpleactive verbs while others may be canonically associated with other grammatical functions such as thepassive, thecausative, theintensive, thereflexive, etc., or combinations thereof. These functions should not be taken as universal or absolute, but are better understood as relational, depending on the particular source of the derived stem.^[3] These grammatical functions are also not present in all Semitic languages. SomeNeo-Aramaic languages, for example, have only two stems, one for monosyllabic verbs and the other for disyllabic verbs, with hardly any cases of related verbs in each stem.^[3][4]

For example, inArabic andHebrew, words containing the root √k-t-b have a meaning related towriting (in Hebrew, aphonological process known asbegadkefat, alters the quality of certain consonants when they follow a vowel, sob becomesv andk becomesḵ (avoiceless velar fricative likeGerman Bach); the symbol ː indicates the preceding consonant is doubled orgeminate). Thus:

• In the basic stem, "he wrote" in Arabic is "kataba", and in Hebrew is "katav".
• In a causative stem, "he dictated" in Arabic is "ʔaktaba" and in Hebrew is "hiḵtīv".
• In the passive stem, "it was written" in Arabic is "inkataba" and in Hebrew is "niḵtav".
• In a reflexive stem, "he corresponded" in Arabic is "kātaba" and in Hebrew is "hitkatːēv".

The following two tables show the full paradigm of templates for the nine most common Arabic stems and the seven most common Hebrew stems, and illustrate some of the different meanings and functions that stems can have.

The first column gives the traditional stem abbreviation used byComparative Semiticists and the second column gives typical stem names used in Arabic and Hebrew grammars; the Arabic system usesRoman numerals, and the Hebrew uses binyanim forms with the root letters √p-ʕ-l (withp sometimes becomingf bybegadkefat). The next columns give the canonical functions of each stem, and their templates (the threeCs stand in for the threeConsonants of the root, andV stands for someVowel). Finally, the meaning and form of the stems with the √k-t-b root is given in the3rd personmasculinesingularperfect, which lacksinflectionalaffixes.^[3]

The tD Stem for Arabic is not given for the √k-t-b root because it does not occur, illustrating that not each root has an actual form for each stem; in fact, √k-t-b has a more complete stem paradigm than many other roots.

In each Semitic language, the number of derived stems is different. In Hebrew, both biblical and modern, there areseven common ones,^[11] and in Arabic there arenine common forms and at least six rare ones;^[12]Akkadian hasthirteen common patterns,Ugaritic hasten,Syriac haseight common ones,Modern Aramaic languages range from two-four,^[4][3] and so on.

There are different ways of naming stems, most systems classify stems by their morphological patterns but others simply number them. In Arabic, a system using Roman numerals is frequently used, as well as a more traditional system where the forms with the root letters √f-ʕ-l (roughly meaning "to do") are used as names of each stem. Hebrew also uses this latter system, although thecognate root used is √p-ʕ-l (withp sometimes surfacing asf bybegadkefat). In Akkadian, forms with the √p-r-s root "to decide" are most often used. The convention using Latin letter abbreviations (such as G, Dt and Š) is a morphological shorthand used most often bycomparativeSemiticists, and emphasizes the relationships between stems within and between languages.

• G-Stem is the base stem, from the GermanGrund ("ground")
• D-Stem typically has aDoubled second root letter
• L-Stem typicallyLengthens the first vowel
• N-Stem has a prefix withN
• C- orŠ-Stem often has aCausative meaning and has a prefix withŠ (ʃ pronounced like Englishsh),S,H, orʔ (theglottal stop).
• t Stems (such astG,tD, andŠt) have an affix witht.

The following table compares some of the important stems of six different Semitic languages:Akkadian,Biblical Hebrew,Syriac,Standard Arabic,Geʿez, andShehri (aka Jibbali), representing different Semitic subfamilies. By examining these and a few other forms, and using thecomparative method andinternal reconstruction, the Grammatical Function and Template for theProto-Semitic derived stems have beenreconstructed.^[7] Theasterisk (*) in the Proto-Semitic Template column indicates that these forms are hypothetical and reconstructed.

Because the L Stem is only attested in the geographically and genetically proximate Arabic andSouth Semitic languages, it is thought to be a later innovation, not present in Proto-Semitic. By contrast, since separate but morphologically similarŠt andŠtG Stems are attested in the relatively distantly related Akkadian and Shehri, these are posited to have been different stems in Proto-Semitic, but to have merged in most later Semitic languages.^[7]

•  Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, §39
• Pattern-and-root inflectional morphology: the Arabic broken plural
• Alexis NEME and Eric Laporte, Do computer scientists deeply understand Arabic morphology? - هل يفهم المهندسون الحاسوبيّون علم الصرف فهماً عميقاً؟ (available also in Arabic, Indonesian, French)

• Afroasiatic verbs
• Linguistic morphology
• Semitic linguistics

• CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list
• Articles with short description
• Short description matches Wikidata