Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>]

>Do you deny that the QATAL form in Syriac can have future reference?
In other words, do you claim that this form always refer to the past,
to the point where it is a past tense (grammaticalized location in
the past)? Please answer my questions with simple words, so the
list-members can understand whether our  viewpoints are similar or
different.>

QTAL in Syriac would not point to future.
I would expect that any future context of *QATAL (=QTAL) in Syriac would
be subordinated to a governing clause.
But I haven't checked to see if it is 'grammaticalized past'.

We disagree on the definition of such terms. Especially in languages
with limited morphologies (QTAL QOTEL NEQTUL) one would
expect that tense-aspect-mood would be shared or cross-mapped
by the forms.
You don't work with such a model (preferring one 'uncancellable
meaning', even if it ends up insipid'), so your grammaticalized past
and my past/perfective/realis aren't really the same thing.

braxot
Randall



-- 
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth AT gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life