[b-hebrew] Psa 107:19-21 (was WAYYIQTOL)

Dave Washburn dwashbur at nyx.net
Sat Mar 27 13:36:35 EST 2004


Hi Philip,
The beginnings of my view are in a 1994 paper in the journal Hebrew Studies, 
published by the National Association of Professors of Hebrew.  Obviously, 
I've been a bit lax in developing the rest of this view, at least in print, 
but that paper (originally given at the 1992 SBL conference) was and is the 
starting point.

On Saturday 27 March 2004 11:18, A. Philip Brown II wrote:
> Hello, B-Haverim,
>
> I've been following the WAYYIQTOL thread with interest.  I have a thorough
> acquaintance with GKC, Waltke-O'Connor, and a passing knowledge of Jouon
> and Williams.
>
> It would be helpful to me and perhaps to others on the list to have a
> bibliography of the key articles/monographs that explicate the various
> positions that are being advanced.
>
> Would those of you who have been advancing the discussion here be so kind
> as to post that bibliographic information?
>
> Thank you!
>
> Philip Brown
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org]On Behalf Of Peter Kirk
> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 6:59 AM
> To: Sameer Yadav
> Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Psa 107:19-21 (was WAYYIQTOL)
>
> On 24/03/2004 17:22, Sameer Yadav wrote:
> >...
> >
> >So although I appreciate your warning about being
> >cautious to reject explanations which appear to cover
> >much of the data, I would also caution you from
> >accepting an entire theory of modal semantics in
> >natural language simply because it can be formed in a
> >neat distribution around the usage of the conjugations
> >in BH.  I think that the relationship has to be
> >reciprocal, with good reasons to accept the general
> >semantic account independently of the way those
> >semantics are uniquely exhibited in one particular
> >language.
>
> Thank you, Sameer. I agree with you. From the data I have seen, Hatav's
> hypothesis is neither confirmed nor disproved. And even if it is
> confirmed for Hebrew, that does not imply that it is generally
> applicable to all natural languages - any more than are models derived
> from English, Russian etc. Modality is obviously a rather slippery
> concept (as we can see from English, Greek etc examples recently
> posted), and Hatav's definition is not the last word on it.
>
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter at qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
Learning about Christianity from a non-Christian
is like getting a kiss over the telephone.




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list