Of course, not. As I described, and what is a standard method of scientific proof, a hypothesis can be accepted if no contradicting facts can be brought against it, and if the hypothesis is simler than others.
This is not proper scientific method. A hypothesis like this which cannot in principle be falsified cannot be established by the absence of falsification.
Peter, you need to read something on logic and scientific methods.
Every hypothesis can be proved false. It is especially easy with mine: just bring any examples where the use of yiqtol is meaningless if we read it either as future tense (with deictic shift, if it is contextually clear) or in idiomatic meaning.
I dispute that such deictic shifts exist in Hebrew, at least unless you can provide evidence of them. I accept that they exist in Russian in the case of indirect speech and similar.
Peter, just think of what you wrote here. What evidence of deictic shifts could be there besides the shifts themselves? Using yiqtol for past events in emphatic narration is just such evidence. ...
... a. Does idiomatic usage of yiqtol (say, ci-yiqtol turns) invalidate yiqtol-as-future tense any more than idiomatic usage of would in English invalidates general function of "would" as future tense? ...
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.