Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Kimmo Huovila <kimmo.huovila AT kolumbus.fi>]

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 18:43:05 +0200
"Rolf" <rolf.furuli AT sf-nett.no> wrote:

> Dear Kimmo,
> 
> It is good to hear from you again.
> 
> If tense is defined as "grammaticalized location in time (Comrie)," I have 
> problems with your statement: "traditional past tense (as a grammatical 
> category) does not correspond exactly to the semantic past tense." If we 
> accepts Comrie's definition, "semantic past tense" should have have read 
> "semantic past reference. We cannot have two different kinds of "past 
> tense." This is not nitpicking, but highly significant in a discussion of 
> tense and aspect.

To me the difference seems purely terminological. I am fine with your 
"semantic past reference". My point is that we should not expect 100 % 
correspondence between past reference and a past tense grammatical form even 
in tense languages.

> For example, are the WAYYIQTOLs in narrative YIQTOLs with past reference, 
> or do they have an intrinsic  past tense, or do they represent the 
> perfective aspect? 

My point is that we need not expect all of them to have past reference or all 
of them to describe a perfective situation to say that TMA is relevant for 
the analysis of the meaning of the form.

Kimmo Huovila