David:
As I have stated before, the main thing I have done in Hebrew is read
the text 20 times or thereabouts, and the major thing I have done
besides reading the text is analyze lexeme definitions.
But in reading the text over and over again, sort of like letting it
flow over me like a child learning a language, I found that many of
the nice, neat patterns I was taught in class often have so many
exceptions that the exceptions sometimes seem to outnumber the rule
following examples. To make it even more interesting, in many
difficult to read verses it can be demonstrated that words are
mispointed: a verb changed to a noun or visa versa, gatal to a
participle, etc. where later Hebrew also had materes lectionis but BH
often does not.
As Peter says, some of the exceptions may be mispointing.
I have not made a detailed study of aspect vs. tense, nor of
incomplete vs. complete use of aspect (I think it is more complex than
that), so beyond recognizing psychological preferences for certain
uses of aspect that tend towards certain tenses, which is an allowance
for such a big hole that one can drive a truckful of exceptions
through it, I hesitate making a hard and fast rule. "Tendency" ≠
"absolute rule".
Karl W. Randolph.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.