Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: <wayyiqtol> again (G.Hatav)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Alviero Niccacci <sbfnet AT netvision.net.il>
  • To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: <wayyiqtol> again (G.Hatav)
  • Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000 16:48:52 +0200


On 02/01/00 (Re: <wayyiqtol> again (G.Hatav)) Rolf Furuli wrote:


Dear Alviero,

You wrote the following to Galia, and sorry to say, I am more confused than
ever about what you mean by "tense". Bernhard Comrie ("Tense", 1985, vii)
defines tense as "a grammaticalization of location in time". I understand
this to mean that "tense" is semantic, i.e. it is connected with verb
*forms* and not with verb *function*. For example, a verb that *is* a
preterit ( such as "went" and "bought") is a preterit in all kinds of
discourses and contexts. The only exceptions will be special cases where an
idiomatic use allows a seemingly non-past use. But such a use must be
accounted for and cannot just be claimed.
Is this also your understanding of "tense"? Or put differently, when we see
a WAYYIQTOL in poetry and prose, in mainline and background, can we take
for granted that the meaning is past, i.e. that the reference time is
before the deictic point?



>
5) (AN) Again, no. By tense I mean a fix reference in time--past,
present, and future. English nicely distinguishes between
chronological time and grammatical tense. What we have in a text is
tense, not time. Tense and time may coincide or diverge. It is the
author who decides, and the verbforms he uses reflect his decisions.
IMO it is not correct to invoke the time of the event in order to
establish the value of the verbforms. In other words, in the text we
read the way the speaker/writer organized his information in a
structured way--according to HIS time, irrespective of the
chronological time. The time of the EVENTS themselves remains outside
the tex and we have to recover it by interpretation. That is why I am
always unease when one brings into the discussion of the verbal
>system the category of event-time.




Dear Rolf Furuli,

Sorry for the confusion I caused you. I suppose Comrie's definition above says exactly what I mean. The excerpt of my answer to G. Hatav you quoted exactly represents my idea. If I am not mistaken, most of what I said comes from H. Weinrich, _Tempus_, a book that is unfortunately forgotten or ignored.
Best wishes.
Alviero Niccacci
Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Tel. +972 - 2 - 6282 936
POB 19424 - 91193 - Jerusalem Fax +972 - 2 - 6264 519
Israel
Home Page: http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/sbf/SBFmain.html
Email mailto:sbfnet AT netvision.net.il




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page