Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Karl,

My definition of the perfective and imperfective aspects are based on 
the relationship I found between reference time and event time in BH, 
as outlined in my post to JR.

The general definition is: "The imperfective aspect is a close-up 
view of a small section of the event where the progressive action is 
made visible. The perfective aspect is a view, as if from some 
distance of a great part of, or of the whole of the event, where the 
progressive action is not made visible." However, this definition 
does not reveal the details of the three planes I mentioned in my 
post to JR.

In contrast, the English imperfective aspect is defined as 
"uncompleted," and the perfective aspect as "completed".

In chapter 8  I list the following list of differences and and 
similarities between the aspects:

1. Both aspects make a part of the situation visible.

2. The imperfective aspect make details visible, but not so the perfective 
one.

3. The imperfective aspect makes a small part visible, but not so the 
perfective one.

4. The imperfective aspect can include either beginning or end; the 
perfective aspect can include both beginning and end.

5. Both aspects can be bounded and unbounded.

6. The imperfective aspect can make visible a part before the 
beginning (conative situations) and a part of a resultatnt state 
(resulatative situations), but not so the perfective aspect.

There are many additional details that can be grasped by looking at 
different examples.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo



> I don't know what Rolf means by "perfective" and "imperfective" if he
> is using different meanings than what is found in the grammar of such
> as Russian, but that verse is neither perfective nor imperfective as
> the terms are used in Indo-European languages. If you insist on the
> Indo-European definitions, then you have set up a false dilemma
> logical fallacy.
>
> Back up your so far unsupported statements.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.