Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>]

On 22/03/2007 15:53, Rolf Furuli wrote:
> ... This means that the start of a supposed grammaticalisation process cannot 
> be found in the Tanakh.
>   

Absence of adequate evidence to support a hypothesis cannot be taken as 
falsifying the hypothesis.

> ... for how can we know that a WAYYIQTOL is a partly grammaticalised past 
> tense, or a fully grammaticalised past tense, or a perfective or an 
> imperfective aspect just by looking at one particular form in its context? ...

Good question. According to your methodology, is there any way in which 
in principle this could be known? If there is not, your methodology and 
your definitions are not helpful ones for the study of ancient 
languages. I could also suggest that your hypothesis that for example 
WAYYIQTOL is NOT a tense is not falsifiable, by your method, and so not 
a proper hypothesis.

> ... Clearly, the prediction above has not been fulfilled. 
>
>   
But that proves nothing, except that the evidence is limited and perhaps 
that the model is unhelpful.

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