Hello Isaac:
Your opinions imply a simple explanation to the problem:
1. verb + pp = past tense;
2. pp + verb = future tense;
3. vav prefix reverses "1" and "2;"
4. context can, and frequently does, change "1" - "3."
So, when reading the text, follow 1-4 for understanding of tense expressed by verb usage.
regards,
fred burlingame
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:
I see what you are saying, and mostly agree with it, except that I prefer to look at it somewhat differently. For example, YI-CMAX, in Gen. 2:5, consists of the verb CAMAX, of the root CMX, 'grow', plus the pre-attached personal pronoun (pp), a.k.a identity marker, YI (which I consider a truncated HIY, 'she') and standing here for ESEB HASADEH, 'the grass of the field'.
It appears that the ancient Hebrews came early on to an agreement to the effect that pp+act will indicate future action, but act+pp will indicate past action (otherwise, Hebrew has no time markers). But it needs not always be so. Thus, YI-CMAX is, on the face of it, just 'he-grow', no more and no less. Conventionally this form is intended to indicate future action, but we know by the time frame of the narrative, by the laws of nature, and also by the preceding word TEREM, that reference is here to the past.
It appears to me that also YI-CMAX of Job 5:6 is but a statement of fact. Yet, the A-CMIAX of Ez. 29:21 is certainly a future promise.
I have the feeling that YA-AL-EH of Gen. 2:6 is "repetitive".
Isaac Fried, Boston University
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.