b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: peter_kirk AT sil.org
- To: <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>, <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
- Subject: Re[2]: vav conversive
- Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 12:44:34 -0400
Dear Dave,
I don't appreciate the tone of this answer, or failure to answer, a
good question about "vav conversive". But I have a more specific point
about the question about the meaning of "word".
I have concluded that a word is no more than the sequence of letters
which are conventionally separated by a space or a punctuation mark in
a particular language. My evidence: Look at the following:
Turkish: "alabilir" means "he can take", one word.
Azerbaijani: "ala bilir" means "he can take", two words.
Exactly the same sequence of letters, the same pronunication, the same
meaning, in two closely related languages. The only difference is the
writing convention. Incidentally "bilir", which alone means "he
knows", is here being used as an auxiliary. Does an auxiliary verb
have a "meaning in the lexical sense"? So is it a separate word, or
not?
If this looks too far from Hebrew, take this example:
Turkish: "ve salam" = "and greetings"
Hebrew: "veshalom" = "and peace/greetings"
This shows that it is merely a writing convention that the "ve-" or
"we-" conjunction in Hebrew is joined to the following noun or verb.
Peter Kirk
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Re: vav conversive
Author: dwashbur AT nyx.net at internet
Date: 01/09/1999 16:50
> What is wrong with the following statement?
>
> A vav conversive indicates:
This is the first thing wrong with it.
<snip>
> 3. What constitutes a word in hebrew?
A word can be given a "meaning" in the lexical sense. Thus the
definite article is a "word" whereas the preformatives of the yiqtol,
for example, are grammatical formatives without any true lexical or
semantic meaning of their own. They exist to modify the verb and
are not words in their own right.
<snip>
-
vav conversive,
Joseph Brian Tucker, 09/01/1999
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: vav conversive, Jim West, 09/01/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Dave Washburn, 09/01/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Paul Zellmer, 09/01/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Brian Tucker, 09/01/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Dave Washburn, 09/01/1999
-
Re[2]: vav conversive,
peter_kirk, 09/02/1999
- Re: Re[2]: vav conversive, Dave Washburn, 09/02/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Bryan Rocine, 09/02/1999
- Re[4]: vav conversive, peter_kirk, 09/03/1999
- Re: Re[4]: vav conversive, Dave Washburn, 09/03/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Brian Tucker, 09/03/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Dave Washburn, 09/06/1999
- Re: vav conversive, myron kauk, 09/06/1999
- Re: vav conversive, Paul Zellmer, 09/08/1999
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.