the guy you need to watch is Ewald, not Gesenius. i first broached the
issue in my 1995 diss. (unpublished). i went into the issues at some
depth in my ZAW 1996 article (9.2: 129-151). i got into the nitty-gritty
in a symosium presentation (2000), "The Invention of Hebrew Tenselessness,
Berlin 1826". (some day soon i'd like to return to those studies, and
work something up for a journal in the history of linguistic thought...)
essentially, sanskrit had launched indo-european studies, and any bright
guy was heavily into the craze (such as Ewald). a key component was an
evolutionary view, in which advanced systems developed out of primitive
systems. west european languages were all "advanced", but non-european
languages were "arrested". the explanation was the arrested mind of the
"orientals", a pillar of "orientalism": it still is, sadly.
hebrew, of course, is not tenseless. i have argued that its aspect is not
graeco-roman, which is the major source of differences; i have also argued
that modal coordination is the other source of difference.
shalom,
V
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr Vincent DeCaen
Adjunct Professor
Near & Middle Eastern Civilizations
University of Toronto
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Donner son consentement, c'est volontaire.
[b-hebrew] Karl: early 1800s ...,
Vincent DeCaen, 02/24/2004