Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Chris:

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Chris Watts <dekruidnootjes AT eircom.net> wrote:

Hallo Karl, I am interested if you might possibly take a few moments to give me some examples of where your reading was inconsistent with what you had learned?  Thankyou.

Chris Watts
Ireland

First, I noticed that some words were used in ways that indicated that their meanings as given in dictionaries didn’t seem accurate. It was more often a nuance than a full meaning, but sometimes the latter as well. Part of that is also how I understand words are used which is different from how some other lexicographers understand how words are used. My understanding is based on action and the range where that action can be applied, theirs more often on form and affect.

 

I was taught two different patterns of verbal use: one where the different conjugations referred to tense, which was the main understanding at the time of Gesenius and Davidson, hence their use of “ preterite” and “perfect” and “future”; secondly that they referred to aspect; neither turn out to be accurate.

There is a pattern of usage for the conjugations, but that pattern doesn’t fit tense, aspect nor mood.

Karl W. Randolph.