Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Alviero Niccacci <alviero.niccacci AT studiumbiblicum.org>]

Title: Re: Fw: Hebrew Syntax., 2 Sam 15:37

> Dear Bryan,
>
> Thank you for your answer. To be frank,
> your interpretation shows in my view how unassailable discourse
> analysis is when it is applied to Hebrew verbs. I would go so far as
> to say that discourse analysis, as it is applied in studies of the
> Hebrew verbs, has all the potentials for hiding the meaning of the
> verbal system.

        <...>

> I know about your great knowledge of
> Hebrew, and with full respect for you as a scholar, I argue that
> discourse analysis leads you astray.

        <...>

Dear B-H list members,

I do not want to get involved in discussions because I am taken by many things but I can not resist.

        Rolf, again you are insisting in your views--which is of course legitimate--even in rather resolute terms when you argue that discourse analysis leads Bryan--and presumably other "discourse linguists"--astray. Personally, although I happen to be listed among them, I rather follow text linguistics, an European approach to the text as communication.

        Any way, Rolf, if one is not ready to distinguish different levels of communication, one will never explain why, e.g., in Gen 3:14 a wayyiqtol form is used in the introduction of direct speech while in 3:16 and 3:17 a x-qatal form is used instead, i.e.,

> - 3:14 WAYYO'MER YHWH 'elohîm 'el-hannaxa$
> - 3,16 'el ha'i$$â 'AMAR
> - 3:17 ûle'adam 'AMAR.
>

This also applies to NT Greek, with aorist vs. imperfect, e.g., in the Gospel of Luke chap. 12:

> - 12:13 EIPEN de tis ex tou oxlou
> - 12:14 ho de EIPEN autôi
> - 12:15 EIPEN de pros autous <...>
> - 12:54 ELEGEN de kai tois oxlois.

Both verb form/constructions (wayyiqtol and x-qatal in Biblical Hebrew, aorist and imperfect in NT Greek) occur one next to the other, apparently they "mean" the same thing, therefore they are the same. If someone is satisfy with this conclusion, OK, I am not, and other people are not as well. Shouldn't we think that if different verb forms/constructions are used, something different is meant? If so, we have to look for appropriate, good examples that can show more clearly than others the difference, then enlarge the research, and eventually confirm or modify our conclusions.

        Rolf, I rapidly went through the examples you quoted in your post (left out above) and I think that I can analyze them according to the theory I am proposing, but frankly I can not at present. Besides, I remember that in the past in this forum I offered you alternative analyses of passages that in your view demonstrated that different verb forms meant the same thing, and after considerable effort both you and I remained of the same opinion.

Best wishes.

--

Alviero Niccacci
Studium Biblicum Franciscanum
PO Box 19424, 91193 Jerusalem (Israel)
Tel. +972-2-6282936; 6264516/7 + extension 250; Fax +972-2-6264519
Home Page: http://www.custodia.org/sbf