Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Paul Zellmer <zellmer AT cag.pworld.net.ph>]

Rolf Furuli wrote:

> Writing a text is communication, and to understand the message (as I see
> it), the first and most important step is to analyse its *words*, at the
> same time accounting for the concept and reference of each word. The next
> step is to analyse how the combination of different words in a phrase or
> clause play together, not to generate new meaning which the context does
> not do, but to learn how the author, by the combination of words, signals
> to the receptor which part of the concept behind each word that is made
> visible. The third step is to do discourse analysis, but this is primarily
> a control of the judgements made in the two previous steps, the only extra
> information I expect by this third step is about what are the theme/rheme
> combinations and which part of the *sentence* is emphasized, if any.

Rolf,

Of course, I can't speak for others who use the discourse analysis tool, but 
your
steps describe how I approach a text.  Of course, your limitations on what 
you hope to
gain out of each step does not describe my expectations.  I would strongly 
disagree
that one step is more important than any other, however.

Let's compare it with an even more basic level of analysis, namely, how we go 
about
gleaning the information from a word.  First step: recognize the phonemes 
that make up
the word.  Next: determine the lexical form of the word.  Finally, determine 
the
grammatical form of the word, e.g., yiqtol, qatal, definite noun, etc.  All 
three
steps are important, and to leave any out or to severely limit what you allow 
to be
learned at any step would cause you to glean only part of the information 
available.

Words are merely tools.  It is the interplay of those tools that are used to 
bring out
the concepts and ideas that are trying to be transmitted.  I can analyze the 
material
and construction of bolts and castings, I can admire the ingenuity of the
construction, but I get little good out of the tools that make up a car 
engine until I
actually let all those parts perform the way they supposed to, until I allow 
the
engine to be started up.  A poor example, but I think the point is apparent.

Rolf, it never ceases to amaze me how we in the academic community can seem 
to be
disagreeing on methods, and yet we all arrive at the same basic understanding 
of the
meaning of the texts.  Could it be that we are not as far apart as our 
discussions
imply?

Blessings,

Paul
--
Paul and Dee Zellmer, Jimmy Guingab, Geoffrey Beltran
Ibanag Translation Project
Cabagan, Philippines

zellmer AT faith.edu.ph