Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] tenses; frequency

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Awohili AT aol.com
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] tenses; frequency
  • Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 15:11:34 +0100

On 10/08/2005 14:00, Awohili AT aol.com wrote:


But doesn't the problem of working with the corpus of a "dead" language hold for any researcher in biblical Hebrew? Does that mean that drawing any conclusions on semantic distinctions is therefore, futile?

Yes, certainly if you take Rolf's rigid approach to semantics.


I would say that the best research regimen would yield the best results possible, even if not iron-clad. And such a best-case regimen is what I see in Rolf's work.


Rolf's research may be good on his working hypothesis. But others have done the same kind of analysis on a working hypothesis (or perhaps a presupposition) of four of five conjugations. And they have not found a contradiction. Rolf claims that he is the only one to have analysed all the data, but he does not claim to have analysed it against the working hypothesis of four of five conjugations. Therefore there is no reason to think that Rolf's results are any better than the four or five component model. The only way either model can be considered even the preferable is if the other one can be found to be contradictory.

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





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page