As you observe the two groups are not mutually exclusive. 'Perfect' *can* make both the beginning and end visible but is not required to do so. This allows for overlap with what Rolf has called the 'imperfect' group. Unless you are willing to engage with Rolf's definitions it is impossible to discuss this objectively.
You continue to challenge Rolf to show how Genesis 12:1 is imperfect and not perfect and yet acknowledge that Rolf's definition allows for overlap between 'perfect' and 'imperfect'. This makes no sense on any level whatsoever.
You also continue to refuse to offer a concrete definition of your use of the terms. All it would take is a few lines of text to make it clear to us how you understand and use these terms.
Just to set you straight, I am undecided if their is an uncancellable meaning to the BH verb system. But if there is an uncancellable meaning then I am unaware of any other work than Rolf's that accounts so well for what that is. However, my real opinion is that I still hold a number of reservations because:
a) We have no informants who can help us conclude the discussion
b) There is simply not enough data
c) Only a small percentage of the data we have allows for a complete analysis
d) The possibility exists that certain verbs allow for exceptions for semantic reasons (e.g. like 'think' in English)
You should therefore view my questions as aids to help you make your criticisms more concrete and academically acceptable rather than assuming I am against your position. How could I be against your position when you still have not defined it properly?
In summary, I am (as yet) undecided but as it stands Rolf has shown a higher level of academic practice in his style of presentation and has succeeded in answering the question he posed (If the BH verb system has an uncancellable meaning, what is it?). You may have some good points to make but are losing the attention of many list members by your refusal to engage in good academic practice.
James Christian
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.