Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Stoney Breyer" <stoneyb AT touchwood.net>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Vadim Cherny [mailto:VadimCherny AT mail.ru] 
On one hand, "grammatical future tense" is a label, similar to yiqtol in

Hebrew grammar.
SB: Well, no: 'yiqtol' is a label describing the form, 'g..f..t..' is a
label ascribing a meaning and a function. The label corresponding to
'yiqtol' would be something on the order of 'will+[Verb base]'

On other hand, idioms have their etymology. It is not incidental that
they 
employ future tense instead of any other. The original meaning of the
idioms 
was related to future tense.
SB: Well, no. You have been told twice now that the "original meaning"
of the English idiom was NOT "related to future tense" . . . I grant
that the extension of the idiom's sense is probably "not incidental"; I
suspect there is a strong inherent tendency for optative, consequential
and future constructions to merge into each other

I would say (idiom), he is at home now. If you allow me to speak my
opinion, 
I would say (future) that he is at home now. (No deictic shift)
Every time I would meet him (idiom), I would tell him. Speaker is
transposed 
back; at least some meetings are in future for him. Thus, future tense
with 
deictic shift.

SB: Well, no. The 'would's here are all modal. 

In your first two examples they can only denote some reluctance to
commit to unqualified assertion. (Contrast: "I say he is at home now"
and "If ..., I say that" or "If ..., I will say that"]

Your third example "every time I would meet him, etc.", though not
"incorrect' is not really idiomatic; likelier constructions are:
a) Every time I met him, I told him ...
b) Every time I met him, I would tell him ... The 'would' here is
insistent, claiming that "I made a point of telling him ..."
If I actually encountered the construction you offer I would interpret
the first "would" as an emphatic pre-echo of the second.

Vadim, I know that the textbooks tell you that 'will+[Verb base]' is
'the future tense' of [Verb] - my son is being taught exactly the same
thing in high school. But it ain't so. You cannot cite English usage in
defense of your Hebrew thesis. And I suspect (but have not sufficient
knowledge of Hebrew to claim] that Hebrew usage hews closer to my
understanding of English than to your understanding of Hebrew.

Stoney Breyer
Writer/Touchwood, Inc.