Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>]

> As a result I skipped a lot. If
> you think I skipped something important, then bring it up again.

how about

"ONE example. Please. Please. Please.
Not Karl's imagination, but one, simple,
unambiguous example where the EXPLICIT object of le-haggid
is not the content of communication (notice that I use the
infinitive construct so as to include the hof`al passives. For a
hof`al that would mean one and any example where the
EXPLICIT subject is not the content of communication.)
Why do I insist on EXPLICIT? Because anybody, even Karl, can
propose an implicit object or implicit subject into whatever they
want and then rewrite and claim a different meaning for the verb.
That is illegitimate methodology and hopefully abhorred by
a Refomation theologist. Such illegitimate methodology is all
that you have offered at Gn 14:13.
So please show ONE EXPLICIT object where
that is not the content of a communication. "

It would be nice to hear the integrity of a statement like,
"I admit that I do not have one explicit example to show that
le-haggid can have a non-communication object. But I
want to believe that it can anyway."
That would be playing the game fairly. Scholarship has room
for that.
"

when you are done with your ONE unambiguous example of semantics,
you can deal with the other points:

1. your confusing of the meaning of a root with the meaning of a hif`il.

2. your mistake about the hif`il imperative not wanting yod in 3ms
without suffix
and your follow up mistake not recognizing that a WAYYIQTOL "sequential prefix
verb" not wanting yod in the 3ms without suffix.
Your answer apparently meant that you don't believe in
a wayyiqtol category, because you mixed yiqtol in with it.
you are mixing apples with oranges. At least limit your search to wayyaqtel
examples and describe the statistics.

3. the morphology of le-haggid in the Bible.
>> When a word is
>> used 369 times one can check ALL of the qatal and imperative and
>> infinitive examples. Do they ALL have a 'he'? Yes, 247 times out of
>> 247 examples.

Please try your answer again.
You didn't get the point that   ALL   UN-AMBIGUOUS
examples are hif`il/hof`al, 100%. You may of course, argue that something 
other
than hif`il/hof`al exists. Then, it would have been nice to see ONE
qal or pi``el that
was not already readable as a hif`il and that did not already make
sense as le-haggid.

huggad leka  הגד לך
ha`od lo habinota העוד לא הבינת

Randall Buth




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