Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>]

> > On 5/21/04 8:50 AM, "Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net> wrote:
> > > The best known one at this point is Waltke & O'Connor.
> >
> > If W&O'C is an "Advanced Hebrew Grammar" why the word
> > "introduction" in the
> > title?

You'd have to ask them.  But it is an advanced grammar, in the sense that 
it's 
not one that you can learn basic Hebrew from.

> > R.Buth called this work "brittle." I have used it on and off since '91
> > but it seems to suffer from many of the same faults as D.Wallace's
> > GreekGrammarBeyondBasics. Certainly W&O'C is a better overall work by far
> > than GGBB but there are similar problems concerning the conceptual
> > framework.

I'm not familiar with Wallace, but I have not been overly impressed with 
Buth's work so his comment doesn't really do much for me.  I agree that there 
are problems with W&O'C's conceptual framework in that it claims to be based 
on modern linguistics, yet the introduction makes it clear that the "modern" 
framework referred to is structuralism, which has been outdated for at least 
50 years now.

When it comes right down to it, IMNSHO, there isn't a really good "advanced" 
grammar available, at least not one that meets the standard of explanatory 
adequacy.  But I haven't seen all of them, so perhaps someone knows of a 
better one than those that have been mentioned so far.

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
Learning about Christianity from a non-Christian
is like getting a kiss over the telephone.