Biblical Hebrew Forum

["C. Stirling Bartholomew" <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>]

On 2/18/05 1:39 PM, "Trevor Peterson" <abuian AT access4less.net> wrote:

> I wonder if this isn't a confusion of categories. Construct state and
> absolute state are morphological conditions, while "nominal part of a
> clause" suggests to me a syntactic issue.

Thank you Trevor,

It seems that  "construct state" as that term is commonly used is more than
just a morphological condition. Unless I have misunderstood the grammarians,
the term construct state is also used of a syntactical function that binds
two or more constituents into a semantic relationship of some kind. In this
case an infinitive construct could fill the same slot in a clause as a noun
in the construct state.

I understand your point, but I have not found the actual use of the
terminology in the grammars to strictly follow the distinction you have
made. There is very often a blending in the grammars which mixes the issues
of morphology and function. So that the same term can be used with both
referents. This creates no end of chaos in Greek grammars and to some extent
it is also present in Hebrew grammars.

I don't doubt that there is some confusion in my original question. It was a
question intended to surface the confusion and get it cleared up.


greetings,
Clay Bartholomew