Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] qatal - yiqtol

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Nir cohen - Prof. Mat." <nir AT ccet.ufrn.br>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] qatal - yiqtol
  • Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 14:08:28 -0300

>>>In Norwegian we have the saying: "What is
obscurely expressed, is obscurely thought." When
list-members use grammatical terms, even
rejecting some of them in Hebrew, and they refuse
to define their terms, the only conclusion I can
draw, is that their terms cannot be defined in
scientific terms, and that they simply do not
know what they are talking about.

rolf,

actually, i made it clear at the outset i did not know much
about aspect theory. it will really be difficult for me to
suggest a comprehensive definition of it, as you ask.
maybe, as carl suggested, you can propose one if you think
it is necessary at this point.

i also clarified i do not reject aspect, or any other grammatical
theory, in hebrew, as you try to make it look. though i do believe
aspect, under any conceivable definition, was not the major
factor in deciding this particular issue, qatal vs yiqtol.

i was also, perhaps wrongly, interpreting a "perfect tense" as
used by you and others here as a tense which suffers ONLY perfect
action. my error was pointed out by chavoux, who defined a perfect
tense (in the BH context, and if i understood him correctly)
as a tense which suffers both past and present actions.

consequently, i sent an email trying to find a common
basis for further discussion.

there was no need to get personal about it. but if you find my
remarks offensive, i apologize.

still, i think you avoid explaining gen 1:10 under your theory.

regards
nir cohen




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page