[b-hebrew] The perspective of this native speaker of Modern Hebrew of Biblical Hebrew tenses
furuli at online.no
Mon Nov 29 04:46:09 EST 2004
Se my comments below.
Peter Kirk wrote:
> On 28/11/2004 21:38, Rolf Furuli wrote:
>>> Tentative conclusion: in the first person, WEYIQTOL forms are not
>>> apocopated, but WAYYIQTOL forms are mostly but not always
>>> apocopated. Does your data contradict this?
>> My data are as follows: Of 543 WEYIQTOLs of 1st p. there are 238
>> (43.8 %) with cohortative. Of the 69 lamedh he-verbs without suffix,
>> 2 (3 %) are apocopated and 67 are not. Of all 1,217 WEYIQTOLs 85
>> lamedh he-verbs and 68 other verbs are apocopated. This means that
>> 12.6 percent of all WEYIQTOLs are apocopated while 27 percent of all
>> WAYYIQTOLs are apocopated. Taking the environments where WAYYIQTOLs
>> and WEYIQTOLs occur into consideration, the differences may be
>> understandable. I analyze 774 WEYIQTOLs as modal and 443 as
>> indicative, while I analyse only 2 percent of the WAYYIQTOLs as modal
>> (I would guess that at least 10 percent of the WAYYIQTOLs are modal,
>> but this is difficult to see, and therefore I have only counted those
>> that I, with a reasonable certainty can say are modal). When I speak
>> of environment, I think of narrative, where the clauses were recited
>> in one way, and modal/future where the recitation probably was
>> different. If apocopation to some degree depends on the rhytm and
>> stress of the clause, I would think of apocopation as more likely in
>> narrative recitation.
>> The conclusion is that the difference between apocopated WAYYIQTOLs
>> and WEYIQTOLs that are apocopated is not so great that a semantic
>> difference is suggested. Further, the apocopation of WAYYIQTOLs to a
>> rather great extend depends on the grammatical person of the verb.
> Thank you, Rolf. Well, I conclude that apocopation is much less common
> in 1st person than in other persons:
> 1st person: 3/543 = 0.06% (ISA 41:28; 42:6; HOS 11:4)
> All persons: 12.6% (your data)
> (543/1217 = 45% are 1st person)
> 1st person: 51/708 = 7.2%
> All persons: 27% (your data)
> (708/15032 = 4.7% are 1st person)
> YIQTOL (including WEYIQTOL):
> 1st person: 13/2803 = 0.046% (DEU 18:16; 1SA 14:36; JOB 23:9,11; ISA
> 41:23,28; 42:6; EZK 5:16; HOS 9:15; 11:4; ZEP 1:2,3,3)
> All persons: 841/11869 = 7.1%
> (2803/11869 = 24% are 1st person)
> The implication is a strong preference for the longer form in the
> first person only. But there is also a very strong correlation between
> apocopation of a first person prefixed form and it being a WAYYIQTOL:
> 51/64 = 80% of these are WAYYIQTOL although in general only 708/3511 =
> 20% of first person prefixed forms are WAYYIQTOL.
> It is also interesting to see that there proportion of WEYIQTOLs which
> are 1st person is nearly ten times higher than the proportion of
> WAYYIQTOLs. That tends to skew the statistics.
> It would also be interesting to see how well the apocopation of
> WEYIQTOLs correlates with a jussive (modal) sense. There is quite a
> strong correlation, although far from a perfect one, with all YIQTOLs,
> and I would expect WEYIQTOLs to match.
Of the 155 apocopated WEYIQTOLs I analyze 42 (27.1 %) as indicative, and
113 (72.9) as modal. As for the 217 apocopated YIQTOLs I analyze 12
(5.5 %) as indicative.
Univesity of Oslo
More information about the b-hebrew