Biblical Hebrew Forum

["K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Dear David:

On 3/27/07, David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> > Karl seems to hold to some similar, though not identical, notion
> > to what an amateur like me would understand by uncancellable intrinsic
> > meaning. But Karl has said he doesn't know what to make of Rolf's
> > theory either.
> >
>
> Karl's approach to lexicography may perhaps be seen as analogous to
> Rolf's work on the verbal system. Their approach assumes that there is
> something uncancellable between every occurrence of a lexical item in
> Karl's case and every occurrence of a verb form in Rolf's.
>
> ...
>
> Regards,
> David Kummerow.

Unlike Rolf, I have never used "uncancellable" in my descriptions of
my methodology. That's because I don't know how it can be applied to
lexicography.

Rather I have looked at definitions according to action (or in the
case of nouns actors) while most lexicography that I have seen
emphasizes semantic domains (form). Often the same action is carried
across several semantic domains. Thus defining according to action
often will see one definition, where according to form (semantic
domains) can see several. It's a different model. As far as I can
tell, there's nothing uncancellable in that.

Karl W. Randolph.