Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 15/08/2005 14:09, Read, James C wrote:

> ...
> JCR: I'm sorry, but this is not a satisfactory answer. This is a total 
> refusal to consider the
> evidence and a stout sidestep away from it.
> Name me one living language that behaves 100% uniform with no exceptions and then I will be able 
> to give more credence to what you have just said. ...

Why do you expect Yitzhak to do this? It is quite clear that he agrees 
with you that every language has exceptions, and so that "starting an 
analysis off of exceptions is methodologically problematic" because the 
reasons for these exceptions are unclear. Nevertheless, the observation 
that all rules have exceptions does not imply that there are no rules; 
on the contrary, "the exception proves the rule".

> ... Also stating that your point of view is backed up 
> by linguists doesn't help because it is usually a subconscious admission that one is not capable 
> of proving his standpoint. ...

It is not a subconscious anything, but a very explicit acceptance that 
Yitzhak is not personally attempting to prove anything, but is only 
passing on what the majority of scholars have said. For he wrote: "I am 
not a linguist and am not qualified to pass judgement on your theory." 
Are you better qualified than he is to pass judgment on what is still 
the majority view of scholars?

> ... We have only touched the iceberg of examples that break down this rigid 
> view of subjects and sequential action and many more examples could be given.
>
>  
Indeed. A few years ago we had a long discussion of examples of 
sequential and non-sequential WAYYIQTOL. Do you really want to start to 
melt this iceberg?


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



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.9/72 - Release Date: 14/08/2005