Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Rolf:

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no> wrote:

>
> Dear Karl,
>
>
> The SIL definition of the  aspect is:
>
> "Aspect is a grammatical category associated with verbs that expresses a
> temporal view of the event or state expressed by the verb."
>
> I accept the definition, but it is so vague that it tells nothing.


I think the meaning was fleshed out, clarified in the subcategories linked
to from the main definition.


>
> Please look at the definitions I have given previously:
>
> "TENSE represents deictic time, which means that it is the relationship
> between reference time and the deictic center (C).
>
> The deictic center is in most cases speech time. An event whose reference
> time comes before (C) is past; when reference time comes after C, the event
> is future; when reference time coincides with C, the event is present.
>
> The definition applies to languages that have grammaticalized tenses.
>
> As I understand it, this gives the same meaning as I meant with my
reference to the time line.

>
> ASPECT represents non-deictic time, which means that the time of the aspect
>  is not seen in relation to a deictic center. Aspect is the relationship
> between event time and reference time.  In order to apply the definition,
> one must get a clear understanding of what "reference time" and "event time"
> are.
>

This definition I find a little bit vague.

However, you do agree that ‘aspect’ refers to time, just that it is a
different measurement of time than tense.

According to all definitions of ‘aspect’ that I have seen, I do not see
Biblical Hebrew as an aspectual language.

>
>
> Regarding Jeremiah 38:9: Verbs in the indicative express actions and states
> in the real world. Verbs that are modal express actions and states in
> imagines worlds.


Here I have to disagree.

For example, imperative indicates which actions are to be done in the real
world.

Purpose deals with the real world, usually expressed in the subjunctive
mood.


> We do not find any imagined world in Jeremiah 38:9. But Ebed-melech is
> concerned about the life of Jeremiah, and he tells the king that the prophet
> "is on the point of dying," or that "he will die" if the situation
> continues. This is a critical situation in the real world. It is no
> exaggeration  (hyperebole), because a person who has not eaten for a long
> time, is on the point of dying, and, if he does not get food, he will die.
>
> In the context, we see the purpose of Jeremiah being thrown into the pit
was that he should die. That is strengthened by the use of the word TXTYW
meaning “because of it”.

TXT has a much larger circle of semantic meaning than any equivalent word in
English, in fact its circle of meaning crosses what in English is divided up
into at least three categories. In the physical spacial sense, it means
“under” or “among”. It is used to indicate exchange, such as replacement
for, in exchange for. That is related to its use to indicate purpose,
“because of”.

In this verse, the waw suffix to TXT refers to an action, namely that of
being thrown down into the pit.

The reason I disagree with that student in this verse is because the
wayiqtol in this verse indicates modality, not aspect nor tense.

>
> Best regards,
>
> Rolf Furuli
>
> Karl W. Randolph.