Biblical Hebrew Forum

[fred burlingame <tensorpath AT gmail.com>]

Hello Karl;

If Furuli and you are correct ......; then what is the purpose of yiqtol and
qatal? Why have two verb forms or conjugations, when one will suffice? If
tense and aspect remain the same with the two forms, then why have two,
instead of one?

This reviewer speaks of "precision" as the reason for the two forms; but his
comments do not sound all that persuasive.

http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/5564_5860.pdf

regards,

fred burlingame

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:18 AM, K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>