...It is true that in the past I have criticised the linguistic model Rolf uses, and especially the assumption within that model that semantic distinctions are totally uncancellable - although I accept that this kind of model is widely accepted. And I may have alluded to that point in the current discussions. However, Rolf is right in saying that my current criticisms of his work are not based not on linguistic assumptions. They are in fact based on simple logic - and in a form which I copied directly from one of Rolf's recent posts. For he wrote (concerning the work of others):
It is correct that Peter`s assumptions regarding the classical Hebrew verbal system are more widely accepted than mine. But I do not think that the same is true regarding his linguistic assumptions. Many linguists would perhaps use other methods in their studies than does Mari Broman Olsen, whose model I use (allthough I reject a part of it), but her linguistic principles are sound. And I would say that the linguistic principles I use are mainstream among linguists. A professional linguist may disagree in some of my applications of my principles and model, but I would not expect that the principles or model would be criticized. (See the longer post I send today).
Moreover, I have not seen that Peter have outlined any linguistic assumptions at all.
It is *assumed* that Hebrew has four different conjugations ... This
assumption prevents any real test of the number of conjugations of the verbal
system, because if you start with four you end up with four.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.