Biblical Hebrew Forum

[David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>]

No, no disagreements with the parameters themselves. Just the 
interpretation of the results which is put through the filter of 
semantics equated with uncancellable meaning.

Regards,
David Kummerow.

> Hi David,
>
> so you don't have any major disagreements with the method used by Rolf 
> to determine his statistics or the values of the statistics he gathered?
>
> James Christian
>
> Quoting David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>:
>
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > it would seem that you have completely misunderstood my request. I
> > > didn't ask you if you agree with Rolf's definition of perfect and
> > > imperfect aspect. Rolf has provided statistics of the verb forms with
> > > respect to temporal reference.
> > >
> > > I was interested in you performing an analysis using the tools Rolf has
> > > used to see if you come up with statistics that vary to any significant
> > > degree. I consider 1 verb form to be an excessively small corpus and you
> > > failed to show what linguistic tools you used to analyse the verb form.
> > >
> > > James Christian
> >
> > Hi James,
> >
> > I personally see little point in doing this on this list where sincere
> > linguistic efforts are mocked and those with standard positions are
> > repeatedly mocked and asked to defend their position over and over.
> >
> > Until there is agreement as to what constitutes semantics, I see little
> > point in progressing. If you want to read others in addition to Rolf
> > using similar principals, see the monographs of Rogland, Goldfajn, Hatav
> > and the dissertation of John Cook.
> >
> > Regards,
> > David Kummerow.
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew