Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

George:

Ruth is again correcting me on my use of terminology and it looks as if I’ll have to change how I say things again.

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 1:30 AM, George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au> wrote:

Hi Ruth!

Thank you for your insightful comments. I think you've shown quite well that we need to distinguish the nature of an action (Aktionsart) from how it is depicted and presented to a reader (aspect). The two are not the same, but they are often confused.

Now this is confusing. “Aspect” is one linguistic term that I was taught that I remember, and my memory is the same as http://www-01.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOflinguisticTerms/WhatIsAspect.htm . How does your use above fit in with the SIL definition?

…

… A much better explanation of the variation in aspect is according to definiteness and indefiniteness. Just as one might switch between 'a horse' and 'the horse' in nouns, so we can switch between 'an action in particular' and 'an action in general'.

Again “definiteness” http://www-01.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOflinguisticTerms/WhatIsDefiniteness.htm . No argument that I can see there.

The problem I see is that passages as Proverbs 31;10–21 and plenty of others is that there’s no definiteness/indefiniteness being expressed by verbal usage. In Proverbs 31:10–31 all the verbs express indefiniteness. Equally so. Yet the conjugations are Qatal and Yiqtol (including Wayyiqtol). Therefore the conjugations express something other than definiteness/indefiniteness.

GEORGE ATHAS

Dean of Research,

Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)

Sydney, Australia

Karl W. Randolph.