Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Bill Rea <bsr15 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz>]

Rolf wrote:-

>An important problem with much of this thread and the corresponding
>threads is that some list-members without a linguistic background are not
>able to see the real issues; they bring "counter-examples" that miss the
>mark, since thay are not trained in ascertaining which parts of the
>clauses convey which meaning.

The issue of missing the mark is what prompted me to say something.
In the years that this debate has carried on, I have found most of
the counter-examples to be intellectually unsatisfying. I don't
wish to take sides on the issue of Hebrew verb forms as I don't
have the expertise to do so.

>I am perfectly aware of the flexibility of language and how languages all
>the time change.

I've known this is your understanding for a long time. The problem
seems to be either that people can't see how flexibility and
uncancelability are not mutally exclusive, or they really think everything
is pragmatic. It is my impression that where there is misunderstanding
some of it is due to the terms used to describe or label the concepts.
But I am not trained in linguistics, so I doubt I can contribute
anything further that is useful. I'll go back to lurking.

Bill Rea, ICT Services, University of Canterbury \_
E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz                </   New
Phone 64-3-364-2331, Fax  64-3-364-2332        /)  Zealand
Unix Systems Administrator                    (/'