From: B. Waltke and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Eisenbrauns, 1990), § 21.2.3e, p. 361:
+-------------+------+------------+------+
| Occurrences | Roots used* |
| # % | # % |
+----------+-------------+------+------------+------+
| Qal | 49180 | 68.8 | 1115 | 71.2 |
| Niphal | 4140 | 5.8 | 435 | 27.8 |
| Piel | 6450 | 9.0 | 415 | 26.5 |
| Pual | 460 | 0.6 | 190 | 12.1 |
| Hithpael | 830 | 1.2 | 175 | 11.2 |
| Hiphil | 9370 | 13.1 | 505 | 32.2 |
| Hophal | 400 | 0.6 | 100 | 6.4 |
| Other | 680 | 0.9 | 130 | 8.3 |
+----------+-------------+------+------------+------+
| Total | 71510 | | 1565 | |
+----------+-------------+------+------------+------+
*The number 1,565 represents the total number of verbal roots used in Biblical Hebrew;
since many roots occur in more than one stem...this number is substantially less than
the sum of the roots used in each stem. The figures in the last column represent the
percentages of all verbal roots (that is, of 1,565), used in each stem.
N.b. Waltke/O'Connor take these numbers from the statistical tables found as appendices to Vol. 3 of E. Jenni & C. Westermann (eds), Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (Hendrickson, 1994).
For comparison, here are the numbers as found by: BibleWorks (v. 7); Accordance (using Groves-Wheeler Westminster Hebrew Morphology v. 4.18); and the SHEBANQ data:
+---------------+---------------+---------------+
| Bibleworks | Accordance | SHEBANQ |
+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| # · % | # · % | # · % |
+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Qal | 50402 · 69.1 | 50030 · 68.9 | 50171 · 68.1 |
| Niphal | 4163 · 5.7 | 4162 · 5.8 | 4147 · 5.6 |
| Piel | 6472 · 8.9 | 6482 · 8.9 | 6816 · 9.3 |
| Pual | 422 · 0.6 | 417 · 0.6 | 495 · 0.7 |
| Hithpael | 842 · 1.2 | 840 · 1.2 | 962 · 1.3 |
| Hiphil | 9494 · 13.0 | 9377 · 12.9 | 9409 · 12.8 |
| Hophal | 396 · 0.5 | 390 · 0.5 | 427 · 0.6 |
| Other | 771 · 1.1 | 1017 · 1.4 | 1252 · 1.7 |
+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Total | 72962 · 100.0 | 72715 · 100.0 | 73679 · 100.0 |
+----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
The three main "lessons" from this data, it seems to me, are:
- the massive dominance of the Qal;
- for passive binyanim, the dominance of the Niphal; seen more starkly when disagreggating actives and passives:
+-----------+---------------+---------------+
| | Bibleworks | Accordance |
| Actives +-------+-------+-------+-------+
| | # | % | # | % |
+-----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Qal (all) | 50402 | 75.9 | - | - |
| Qal (act.)| - | - | 48975 | 75.5 |
| Piel | 6472 | 9.8 | 6482 | 10.0 |
| Hiphil | 9494 | 14.3 | 9377 | 14.5 |
+-----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| | 66368 | 100.0 | 64834 | 100.0 |
+-----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
+-----------+---------------+---------------+
| | Bibleworks | Accordance |
| Passives +-------+-------+-------+-------+
| | # | % | # | % |
+-----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Niphal | 4163 | 83.6 | 4162 | 69.1 |
| Qal pas. | - | - | 1055 | 17.5 |
| Pual | 422 | 8.5 | 417 | 6.9 |
| Hophal | 396 | 8.0 | 390 | 6.5 |
+-----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| | 4981 | 100.0 | 6024 | 100.0 |
+-----------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
- and the importance of the Qal:Piel:Hiphil network for the "system".
HT: @Susan for contributing Accordance data