Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>]

On 29/06/2006 17:42, Ken Penner wrote:
> Peter wrote:
>
>   
> > Indeed, but getting (probably) even closer in time to the 
> > original, the LXX is EGW EIMI hO WN "I am the being (one)", 
> > all present tenses. This is because, according to many, 
> > Hebrew changed from being aspectual to being tensed during 
> > the Hellenistic period, from the influence of Greek. 
> > Early in this period, when LXX was translated, the original 
> > aspectual sense was still understood. By several centuries 
> > later, the time of Theodotion and Aquila, the aspectual sense 
> > was being lost and the verbs were being understood as future 
> > tense forms.
> >     
>
> Can you provide references for these "many" who claim Hebrew changed from being aspectual to tensed in the Hellenistic period? Can you trace the sources for these claims? 
> The reason I ask is that to my knowledge, the major study the translation of the tenses in the LXX concludes that the Hebrew verb forms were not tenses or aspects but moods at the time of translation.
>
>   
Ken, you obviously know much more than I do about Hebrew from the 
Hellenistic period. Perhaps I went too far in suggesting that the change 
to a tensed language was completed during this period. I can point you 
to many authorities, from Gesenius to Furuli, who agree that biblical 
Hebrew was aspectual. It is well known that modern Hebrew is tensed. I 
have certainly seen it suggested that this change goes back to the 
Hellenistic period, but maybe at that period it was only partial. 
Perhaps you would care to enlighten us further about what these verb 
forms actually meant in Hellenistic times.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail:  peter AT qaya.org
Blog:    http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/