Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Bryan Rocine" <596547 AT ican.net>]

boqer tov, haver Randall,

you wrote:
>{bryan wrote:}
>>if the question is "what do you do?"
>>'elmad `ivrit    {end quote}
>
>somehow this doesn't feel quite right.
>
>i find it very interesting that you are drawn back to prefix verbs as
>though to a magnet. i wonder what it is in training material that does
>this? [=i don't think it is the biblical text itself doing this.]
>
>even in the above example i would not expect habitual/future prefix verbs
>to be most frequent. 
>
>do you have some "plain vanilla" prefix examples that refer to the a real
>present? 
>we might look at them together to see what is happening, just where and
>when are they permissible. 

Deu 5:24 hayom hazeh ra'inu ki y:daber 'elohim 'et ha'adam vaxay  = modal,
right? "this day we see that God speaks with man yet he is alive"

BH poetry is replete with examples, e.g.  
Psa 38:14 va'ani k:xere$ lo' 'e$ma`  "and i am as a deaf one (who) doesn't
hear
or  Isa 59:10-11 n:ga$$ah ka`ivrim qir "we grope the wall as blind ones,"
etc.

one thing in common between the three examples above:  they are all three
examples of what i call expository discourse which defaults for present
tense.  one thing in common about the last two: they sorta describe this
field of ours in our search for the verbal semantics of BH...no offense,
please, anyone...  ;-)  i'm just teasing.  ;-)
 
or we have a somewhat celebrated distinction between 
Gen 42:7 me'ayin ba'tem "where have you come from?"
when it was clear the journey was complete and 
Jos 9:8 me'ayin tabo'u  "where aree you coming from?"
when it was assumed the journey was in progress.  oh, but this last example
is a question... ;-)  

how many examples do you want?  i'm a touch bewildered by your
bewilderment.  we must be talking past one another.  ???

>
>(e.g. they are very frequent in questions about actual goings-on! but in
>the answers?) [also, e.g., uxal "i can" lo uxal "I can't" is one such
>idiomatic prefix present, but its modality is lexicalized. yaxol "able
>(part/adj)" doesn't even exist in BH.]
>
>still, your second question, "what are you doing?" seems to imply that you
>would AGREE that the participle is the default form for an actual present
>situation. students could use that information.
>
>{bryan wrote:}
>>"what are you doing?"
>>'ani lomed `ivrit  [end quote]

is the participle statistically dominant in present contexts?  i think
that's pretty clear.  default for present?  i'm not sure, to be honest.  i
don't think the dominance is complete enough, and the participle shows up
too freely in the past.  i'm quite sure that the participle defaults for
imperfectivity.  my point is that the dominance of form in a clearly
present context may *not* be determined by the present time of the context.
 it may be determined by the pragmatics of the context which is under the
influence of the time.  statistically, the participle most surely wins out,
but the question remains, in our discussion here, as to why.  i think the
statistical superiority of the participle in the present time contexts may
be a function of the compatibility of imperfectivity with the present time.
 in turn, i think the statistical superiority of the participle in present
time contexts and its inherent compatibility with present time may have
resulted in its evolution into a true present in post-Biblical H.  

one thing that is very interesting to me is that we can describe the
evolution of BH from a theoretical proto-Semitic through the Biblical
period(s) through the post-Biblical Hebrews.  but where we put the Biblical
corpus down on the "timeline"(i realize the evolution is not simply
linear), is somewhat of a mystery.  and faced with a mystery, that tricky
thing called *bias* becomes rather vigorous.  

you want to immerse students of BH to BH naturally, in an environment that
promotes *using* BH in realistic situations, is that right?  how badly do
you need the participle to default for present?  pretty badly, i would
guess, but does it really mean present in BH?  if, in your course, the
statistical superiority of the participle for present time contexts
exaggerates its actual superiority in the Biblical corpus, then you would
be suggesting by rehersal that the BH participle means something it
doesn't.  i guess a healthy dose of participles in a past contexts would go
a long ways towards keeping the situation "biblical."  :-)

>
>at least now students may be able to think and talk in Biblical Hebrew.
:-)
>  If their only choices had been prefix verbs and suffix verbs they might
>never really get started thinking or doing something in the language in
the
>hear and now.    ma na`ase?
>
>braxot veHag sameaH. mi yitten ve-hirbeta le'exol sufganiyot!
>randall

toda gam leka

Bryan


B. M. Rocine
Associate Pastor
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13208

315-437-6744(w)
315-479-8267(h)