Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Chavoux and Arnaud:

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Chavoux Luyt <chavoux AT gmail.com> wrote:

> Shalom
> I just want to ask if the Biblical Hebrew Grammar that was developed
> really come from European languages?
> E.g. the whole Kal (p'al), pi'el, nif'al, hitpa'el, hif'il, hof'al and
> pu'al verbal forms are part of standard Hebrew
> Grammars, but is not found in any European languages as far as I know.
>

I am one who thinks functionally, not formally. Modern grammars (from the
last few centuries) assign functions to the Hebrew forms, functions derived
from European languages.

For example, European linguists have long assigned tense as the function of
the qatal, yiqtol and participle forms of the Hebrew verb (which I have been
told is the function of those forms in modern Hebrew). Dr. Furuli’s
dissertation shows that that cannot be true for Biblical Hebrew.

More recently, some linguists have tried to assign the function of aspect,
fully grammaticalized in Russian for example, to the qatal and yiqtol forms.
Reading the whole of Tanakh finds many examples where that function is
counter-indicated by their contexts.

How much of the above functions do apply to Mishnaic Hebrew? I don’t know.

If one thinks formally, not functionally, then he may not recognize these
questions.

So what are the main functions of the qatal and yiqtol forms of Biblical
Hebrew verbs? As far as I can tell, they have no equivalent in European
languages, hence no terminology to describe them. How many linguists cannot
conceive of linguistic concepts for which they have no terminology?


> Regards
> Chavoux
> <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>
>

Karl W. Randolph.