Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues
  • Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:35:59 +0100

On 27/03/2007 15:08, Rolf Furuli wrote:
...
The real issue is whether the Greek saying PANTA REI (everything is
streaming; "nothing is certain") can, and should be applied to grammar,
including Hebrew grammar. I think most of the list-members would say No. ...

Well, I don't know if you intend to take any kind of vote, but I vote "Yes". Not that the majority opinion on a list like this tells us much.
...
The real issue can be stated this way, 1) Do uncancellable (intrinsic)
meaning exist in lexical semantics, and 2) Do uncancellable (intrinsic)
meaning exist in grammar? I say Yes in both cases, some others say No.
Semantic meaning in grammar can be illustrated by the fact that the English
aspects (represented by the participle and perfect, respectively) are mutually exclusive.

Well, I say No. And you are not likely to win my favour by repeating a misrepresentation of my mother tongue after both David and I have corrected you with clear proof that these grammatical forms are not mutually exclusive. Here is one demonstrable and proven error which you need to correct.

... In onother instance the "flaws" are based on the
views of one who has not read my dissertation. ...

Yes, Rolf, I have not read your dissertation, and I have never claimed that I have. But I have read very many of your postings on this list. And the flaws I have discovered in your thinking are not those in your dissertation but those in your reasoning as you have presented it on this list. It may be that your dissertation is impeccable, but in that case you yourself have misrepresented its arguments on this list.

... I for one will never expect that another person should concede error, if such have not been proven.

I fully agree with you that no one should concede an error unless it has been proven. That is why at present I am not going to concede any errors in this matter, nor apologise. If you prove me wrong, I will accept it and apologise. If you simply ignore me or refer to me only obliquely in the third person, I shall continue to conclude that you have no answer to give to my critique.

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





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page