Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Randall,

We should keep in mind that the Greek text of Matthew 24:15 is not 
the original text. The words was spoken by Jesus, probably in Hebrew, 
and then translated into Greek. A distinction between indicative and 
jussive is only occasionally marked morphologically in Hebrew. So the 
Greek text need not necessarily illuminate the Syriac text.

But let us take a look at the Greek text for a moment. There is a 
connection between conjunctions and modal forms in Greek, and because 
you are a teacher of Greek I ask the following question: Will a verb 
in Greek subjunctive always refer to possibility, uncertainty or to 
imagined worlds? Or can it refer to situations that are certain, to 
the point where a Greek subjunctive can signal the same as indicative?

I use one passage as an example, namely, John 3:16. A strictly 
literal translation would be: "For God loved the world so much that 
he gave his only-begotten /unique son, in order that everyone showing 
faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life."  The 
word "destroy" is subjunctive, and the question is: Is the meaning 
that the one showing faith in Jesus *perhaps* will not be destroyed, 
or does Jesus mean that the one showing faith *with certainty* will 
not be destroyed but have everlasting life? In other words: does the 
subjunctive form here have the same function as an indicative?


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo



> vayyixtov Rolf
> > [Mt 24:15] . . .
> >  So, the QATAL form is used with future reference, and QATAL
> >  can therefore not be defined as "grammaticalized past".>
>
> according to Rolf.
> but the examples are still relatively past to their main clause.
>
> And there is a difference in language between a semantic world that
> can be specified by an analyst and the presentation of that world
> by the language user.
>
> Note the Greek source:
> OTAN OYN IDHTE 'when-potentially you would see . . ."
> the language user chose the subjunctive, and a subjunctive marked
> as potential by 'AN'.
> The analyst can say that this is "indicative" semantically or that
> the speaker is certain,
> but the system chosen by the user did not mark indicativeness.
>
> So based on the above I wouldn't want to say that Syr *Qatal has
> no temporal constraints within it.
>
> What is HWO doing in QOTEL HWO?
> and even more, what is it doing in NEQTUL HWO?
> Most would say that it is adding a past frame to the participle. So
> I am comfortable with leaving some 'pastness' within the internal
> configuration of HWO.
> With the NEQTUL the HWO may still mark past but may also slide
> into more modal situations that bring forth the NEQTUL.
> (I don't have materials at hand.)
>
> blessings
> Randall
>
> --
> Randall Buth, PhD
> www.biblicalulpan.org
> randallbuth AT gmail.com
> Biblical Language Center
> Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew