Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Verbal Aspect (was Tenses - Deut 6:4)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Verbal Aspect (was Tenses - Deut 6:4)
  • Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 14:23:16 +1100

Hi Rolf,

I take it that the perfective :: imperfective opposition is one of grammatical/inflectional aspect vis-a-vis lexical Aktionsart. Perfective aspect covers the range of actions conceptualised as complete and undifferentiated; imperfective aspect covers the range of actions conceptualised as incomplete and differentiated.

If these definitions are acceptable, the prefix verb in Gen 18:11 would refer to a perfective action. And in the other references, the suffix verbs would be used of imperfective actions.

Regards,
David Kummerow.


Subject:
Re: [b-hebrew] Tenses - Deut 6:4
From:
"Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>
Date:
Fri, 2 Mar 2007 15:10:44 -0000
To:
<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>

To:
<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>


Dear David,

Some comments of yours caught my attention:

However, the question can actually be framed the other way
around, ie, how can so-called primarily aspect marking forms be used for
both aspects? I say this because yiqtol, which is supposedly
imperfective aspect, can be used perfectively (eg Gen 18:11) and qatal,
which is supposedly perfective aspect, can be used imperfectively (eg
Gen 38:9; Num 11:8; 21:9; Jud 2:18; 6:3; 2 Kgs 18:4). It is these types
of issues which I have yet to see an aspectual analysis tackle. (I would
love to be proved wrong on this and be pointed to the relevant
literature.)


The claims that the perfective aspect is used imperfectively and the
imperfective aspect is used perfectively are quite dramatic. These claims must
be based on a particular definition of aspect, and here is a basic weakness
of most studies of the Hebrew verb. A particular definition of aspect,
applied to other languages than Hebrew is often used. (Often the works of B. Comrie, who do not distinguish between aspect and Aktionsart, are used in Semitic studies.) And the study is based on this definition. In one of the posts referred to by Yitzhak I list seven different kinds of aspect used in the scholarly literature and twenty-four descriptions that are used to refer to these "aspects".

Which one is your definition? Could you please demonstrate on the basis to the passages you refer to *how* the imperfective aspect can be used imperfectively and the perfective aspect be used perfectively.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli Ph.D
University of Oslo





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page