Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 01/08/2005 12:43, Rolf Furuli wrote:

> Dear Peter,
>
> Your arguments below are of such a nature that I am considering whether 
> there is any purpose in answering your posts any more.
>
>  
Rolf, I don't understand your problem here. I know you don't agree with 
my understanding of WAYYIQTOL. But you seemed to present these as 
examples of how your understanding must be correct, and by implication 
mine incorrect. Indeed you apparently made a claim earlier in that 
posting to have falsified the model "aspects with the opposition 
complete/completed versus incomplete", which is similar to the model I 
had in mind (which also includes a discourse-related element similar to 
Bryan's). My point here was to show that these verses can be understood 
according to such a model, and thus that this model is not falsified at 
least by these examples.

Now I don't want to oblige to enter into a detailed discussion of such 
examples, which might be rather long. But I do want you and others to 
understand that a four component aspectual model clarified with 
discourse considerations is not easily falsified (unless you insist on 
rare anomalous and possibly textually corrupt uses as falsifying a 
general rule). Your full dissertation may provide such a falsification, 
but simple examples like these two do not.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/