[b-hebrew] Kamatz katan; Ashkenazi pronunciation; was: Translating
VadimCherny at mail.ru
Sat Oct 7 17:38:44 EDT 2006
> On 07/10/2006 23:10, Vadim Cherny wrote:
> >> So, it is *a fact* that there are no proofs that
> >> WAYYIQTOLs existed before the Masoretes. I did not discuss speculation
> >> beliefs; I discussed morphological evidence.
> >> Rolf Furuli
> > It is very much possible that the Masoretes invented wayyiqtol. They had
> > good reason to do that.
> > As I see it, tense forms developed as follows:
> > - qatal for the past tense, weqatal for the future
> > - new FT form yiqtol
> Indeed? When exactly do you think that YIQTOL was "new"? At any time
> relevant to biblical Hebrew?
yiqtol is a new form compared to weqatal
> > at that point, there were two forms of the future tense, and one form
> > much more common past tense. Someone should have got a bright idea of
> > developing a form for the past tense symmetrical to weqatal. Thus,
> > is likely an artifical form.
> > Could the MT wayiqtols been originally weyiqtols. Very much! ...
> I accept "Could". I do not accept "*a fact*". Speculate as much as you
> like, but speculation does not imply fact.
Peter, you need to learn logic. There are no facts in sciences other than
mathematics. Everything, even what we consider observation, is a conjecture.
> > A note to Peter: logically, Rolf correctly equates absence of positive
> > evidence with negative evidence. That is the way of proof in all
> > but mathematics. Perhaps some future experiments would invalidate the
> > of light limit, but before that, we take that limit for proven. Science
> > develops through refutations, not positive proofs.
> Vadim, your idea of science is very limited. This is not how science
> works. The "speed of light" limit is not an experimental one but a
> theoretical one.
Oh, would you like a discussion on logic or semiotics? Welcome!
Every theory is a conjecture not yet refuted and that passes Occam's razor.
More information about the b-hebrew