Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew Digest, Vol 74, Issue 24

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] b-hebrew Digest, Vol 74, Issue 24
  • Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:39:40 +1100


Lipiński has a little bit of discussion in:

Lipiński, Edward. 2001. Semitic Languages: Outline of a Comparative Grammar. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 80. Leuven: Peeters.

I haven't been able to check the following references, which may be worthwhile:

Arad, Maya. 2003. “Locality Constraints on the Interpretation of Roots: The Case of Hebrew Denominal Verbs.” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21: 737-778.
Bolozky, Shmuel. 1978. “Word Formation Strategies in the Hebrew Verb System: Denominative Verbs.” Afroasiatic Linguistics 5: 1-26.
Gerber, W. J. 1896. Die hebräischen Verba denominativa. Leipzig: Hinrichs.

As an aside, I see that Lipiński is another scholar who accepts the intensive/verbal plurality function of the D-stem in Semitic.

Regards,
David


Peter & David (et al.),

I have often wondered about this: how can we know that a verb is denominative rather than the noun being deverbal? I have read a fair amount of theoretical and historical linguistics (Hebrew and general), but never seen this discussed.

It seems that the theory of denominativization assumes that nouns precede verbs in the development of a language; has this ever been demonstrated?

I'm not arguing against it, just wondering how sure we can be that things worked/happened this way.

Peace.

Fred

P.S. My students had just read the chapter on the piel, and one asked (to general head-nodding), "So what difference does this make, anyway? I mean, why does it really matter that we know that these verbs are piel, since they just sound normal?" A very interesting discussion ensued, as you might imagine.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page