Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - About Galia's Theory of Wayyqtol

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Moon-Ryul Jung" <moon AT computing.soongsil.ac.kr>
  • To: b-hebrew
  • Subject: About Galia's Theory of Wayyqtol
  • Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 11:59:14


Dear Galia Hatav,

I am excited to read your theory of Biblical Hebrew tense system based on
Hans Kamp's Discourse Representation Theory. I read his papers when I
studied computational linguistics at the Dept of Computer Science,
University of Pennsylvania. I was involved in the project for
understanding
instructions and transforming them into 3D animation. But it never
occurred to me that I might be able to use the theory for my reading of
Hebrew Scriptures!

To understand your theory better, let me ask some questions.

By using the following examples,

1. a. Mary entered the room. She turned the light on and...
b. Mary entered the room. She felt depressed...
c. Mary turned off the light. It was dark in the room.

you concluded that while in English past verbforms introduce new
reference time (R-time) only by pragmatic inferences, in BH the form
of Wayyiqtol always (semantically) builds an R-time.

But you conceded:

There are at least two cases where wayyiqtol
clauses do not build a new R-time. One: in formulas such as "waydabber
wayyomer" and hendiadies such as
"wayyimshexu wayya'alu". The other case is with paraphrases: The
narrator
starts a story, stops and starts it again to provide some detail he did
not mention the first time. There are also counterexamples which I cannot
explain. (My statistical counting shows 3% of such cases.)


If you have to concede that wayyiqtol clauses may not build a NEW R-time,
but may go back to previous time points, the situation seems to be the
same as English. Examples 1.b and 1.c above are more like wayyiqtol + (we
+ X + qatal), where (we+X+qatal) do not tend to introduce a new R-time, but
explains the situation in question. So, when we compare examples like 1.a
with a sequence of wayyqtol clauses, may we not be able to conclude that
the R-time is pragmatically determined both in English and in BH? Why do
you believe that BH is different from English? Are you aware of any other
languages like BH in this respect? The notion that the R-time could be
semantically determined is so shocking to me.

Moon-Ryul Jung
Assistant Professor
Dept of Computer Science
Soongsil University,
Seoul, Korea




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page