[b-hebrew] no to aspect?
if at math.bu.edu
Mon Feb 7 22:16:20 EST 2011
You are right, but I hope you fully appreciate the delicacy of the
background issue. For many people it is theologically imperative to
understand what the Hebrew bible is saying. But the fact that the
language of the bible is often non grammatical gets in the way. Are
certain sayings of the prophets about the past, the present, the
immediate future, or the distant future? Context, which is often too
meagre, and a factual background, which is often uncertain, may not
be helpful. No end theological controversies arise from these, often
nebulous, textual passages, and their variously possible
understandings. Recall the well known example of Exodus 35:3, the
crucial edict: LO T-BAAR-U E$ B-KOL MO-$B-OT-EY-KEM B-YOM HA-$ABAT.
Does T-BAAR-U mean start a fire, as is the rabbinical understanding,
or does it mean leave a fire burning, as is the karaite הקראים
understanding (I think they don't consider fluorescent light as "fire")?
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Feb 7, 2011, at 4:58 PM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. wrote:
> [in particular, grammar cannot attribute any fixed, absolute,
> context-free dynamical value to a single word, the way you do.]
More information about the b-hebrew