Gen. 2:19 and the "party line" posting
Dave Washburn
dwashbur at nyx.net
Sat Jan 23 01:34:25 EST 1999
Paul,
> 2) Mark Joseph, citing W&O'C, proposes an English pluperfect
> understanding of the construction. You countered the idea of
> translating a wayyiqtol as a pluperfect by addressing Mark's
> examples, but you never say what to do in this case. Your
> response kicks off a post by Dave Washburn, who points to this as
> another example of the weaknesses of the discourse analysis
> approach. (This posting might well become infamous as "the party
> line" posting.)
It was not my intention to single out discourse analysis in my
"infamous" posting :-) The "party line" I spoke of actually focused
more on the Gesenius-Driver-etc. approach of days gone by
regarding the WP. My personal jury is still out on discourse
analysis because I need to examine it more closely. As I stated
before, I have deliberately chosen to focus on the clause level, and
syntax within the clause, but that doesn't mean that I cast any
stones at discourse analysis. I need to learn more about it, just as
I suspect the discourse folks need to learn more about my
generative approach, because I suspect there's a lot we can learn
from each other. If my post came across as a slam on discourse
analysis, I apologize. It certainly was not intended.
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
A Bible that's falling apart means a life that isn't.
More information about the b-hebrew
mailing list