Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Barry:

What I was taught in class : what I found in Tanakh

Hebrew sytax, verb first in sentence : verb any place in the sentence
Masculine plural, always end -YM : sometimes the yod is missing

And in this specific case, that where two nouns are in construct, when the
second noun is plural in a context where the first noun should also
logically be plural (e.g. the soldiers’ feet) then the grammar follows the
logic, i.e. the first noun is also a plural, but what I found is that the
first noun is sometimes singular.

As for the Qatal and Yiqtol, I was told that some thought them to be tenses
as in English, other aspect as in Russian, but neither are correct. Here I’m
thrust into the unknown, as none of the models predicated on Indo-European
languages fits what I read daily.

I was taught in class that the Masoretic points were correct, I stopped
using them because I found they are sometimes wrong as far as *meaning* is
concerned, let alone that there is no way they can be an accurate rendition
of Biblical era pronunciation. Further, I think many of the minutia found in
Hebrew grammars are there to explain misunderstandings caused by wrong
pointing.

Your question has me rattling the memory banks to try to recall other
lessons from my first year of class that I had to forget when reading
Tanakh, but it’s been well over a decade since I last had a Hebrew grammar
in my hand, and I truly have forgotten those lessons.

As for which Hebrew text to begin with? I am tempted to have students just
start with Genesis within a few weeks of starting first year class, starting
with the first chapter. Get the students used to reading the text, teaching
the grammar along with the text. Even though I attended one year of college
Hebrew, that is basically how I learned Hebrew. I mean, really learned
Hebrew, how it is really used instead of the way it was presented in class.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Barry <nebarry AT verizon.net> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
> To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 7:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Ruth
>
>
> > As for “first year lies” (a phrase I to which I was introduced on
> this list, I don’t remember who taught it to me), I was taught that Hebrew
> followed certain grammar, syntax and spelling rules, and all the examples in
> the text books followed those rules. Later, when I started reading Tanakh
> for myself, cover to cover, I was in for a shock—those rules were often
> violated. I had to learn a new set of rules to fit the data before my eyes.
> >
> > My criticism in this particular example (not by any means for
> anything with which I disagree) was that you seem to insist that Hebrew
> follow those rules as taught in first year class, rather than how the
> language is actually used in Tanakh.
>
> Beginning grammars always present an ideal version of the languages for
> didactic purposes, usually using particular authors.  For beginning Latin
> it's Caesar and Cicero with a dash of Vergil for flavor.  For beginning
> (Classical) Greek it's usually Xenephon and Plato.  What beginning grammars
> can't communicate is the licence that individual authors use with the
> languages.  But this freedom is usually stylistic, lexical selection,
> idiomatic phrases.  You never see violation of basic grammar, such as
> subject verb agreement, and forth.
>
> So, what are the models for the ideal grammer of biblical hebrews.
>
> N.E. Barry Hofstetter
> Classics and Bible Instructor, TAA
> http://www.theamericanacademy.net
> (2010 Savatori Excellence in Education Winner)
> Mentor, TNARS
> http://www.tnars.net
>
> http://my.opera.com/barryhofstetter/blog
> http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry
>
>