discourse and aspect

c stirling bartholomew cc.constantine at worldnet.att.net
Sun Jan 6 13:04:31 EST 2002


on 12/24/01 12:59 PM, Paul-Jennifer Schaefer wrote:

> Dave,
> Actually discourse analysis is not as transparently complicated as you've
> presented it.  As chiasmus (or contrast, which would be a better term for
> what is happening here) does in inself form a cohesive unit, you could
> expect this smaller unit to fit "as is" into the larger narrative-wayyiqtol
> chain structure.  It is only unattached X-qatals that would indicate
> something being off the mainline.  Or that is how I understand it, at least
> (comments?).
> 
> Paul Schaefer

Paul,

Your comments sound like they presuppose  R. E. Longacre's approach to verb
aspect and narrative structure. For a critique of this model you might find
*Heimerdinger worth reading.

*Heimerdinger, Jean-Marc. Topic, focus and foreground in ancient Hebrew
narratives, Sheffield Academic Press, c1999.

Since the early 90's I have been listening to the Discourse Analysis folks
claim that verb aspect (both Greek and Hebrew) is used to distinguish the
main narrative sequence from constituents which are "off the mainline."
After trying to apply this scheme to actual texts for a few years I find it
doesn't work very well and for that reason I was very pleased to see
*Heimerdinger's monograph which confirmed my suspicion that this model has
problems.

Greetings,

Clay


--  
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list