Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Verb Inflection & Tense

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Verb Inflection & Tense
  • Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 22:17:17 +0500

Rolf, thank you for this explanation of your idea of aspects, which is clearer and more convincing than I have seen from you before. I can accept that Hebrew aspect is not exactly the same as Slavic, although I still think it makes more sense to understand WAYYIQTOL as indicating perfective rather than imperfective aspect, even with somewhat non-standard definitions; after all, WAYYIQTOL (as opposed to YIQTOL and WEYIQTOL) systematically and overwhelmingly refers to completed events in the past, suggesting that, even if tense and aspect are not consistently grammaticalised in Hebrew, this particular WAYYIQTOL form is a perfective past tense.

But there is one more point below which I would like to comment on:

On 03/10/2005 12:07, Rolf Furuli wrote:

... However, in the Phoenician Karatepe inscriptions, the infinitive absolue plays the same role as WAYYIQTOL in Hebrew. There are 16 infinitive absoluts with prefixed WAW and 5 without prefixed WAW that describe past, completed events. No one would claim that the infinitive absolute has an intrinsic past tense or perfectivity. ...


Why not? In some languages e.g. Koine Greek infinitives intrinsically have both tense and aspect. There is no good reason why the Phoenician infinitive absolute should not have one or other of these. The more unusual thing is that it is used as a finite verb, although in fact infinitives are used as imperatives, a finite form, in many languages. Anyway, presumably even if the form is etymologically an infinitive absolute, its meaning within the language is determined by its use, which is apparently as a finite verb.

An alternative is that the Phoenician form called an infinitive absolute is not in fact this at all. I'm not sure how it can be identified as such in inscriptions with no vowels, not even matres lectionis. The form could presumably just as easily be an eroded (WAY)YIQTOL form which has lost its personal prefixes.

--
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