Comments for Ancient Hebrew Grammar

Comment on Hebrew verb theory . . . ten years gone by johncookvw

johncookvw — Tue, 14 May 2013 19:18:28 +0000

I’m not thinking etymologically, but semantically: show me a ve-qatal expressing epistemic modality; show me one expressing dynamic modality? There are differences in distribution, as you yourself know (“fairly consistent complementary distribution”), and lumping them together semantically and attempting to distinguish them syntactically or, gasp, discourse pragmatically (Really, sequentiality? I’ve been waiting since publication of my 2004 JSS article for someone to present to me just one example of a fully inflected “sequential verb” from any of the world’s languages.) is simplistic and inaccurate. Of course simplistic and inaccurate grammatical explanations have been the hallmark of so many introductory grammars, that we assume just because it works “fairly” well for beginning students it must be correct!

Comment on Hebrew verb theory . . . ten years gone by R B

R B — Tue, 14 May 2013 16:47:42 +0000

I was just passing by, shalom!
>However, I and the audience can agree that he made a fatal misstep in the “selling” of his theory by claiming that weqatal and yiqtol are mere allomorphs, stated in a rather off-handed manner, as though somehow self-evident.

Allow me to voice support, gasp, for Joosten’s “fatal” [sic] joining of yiqtol and ve-qatal. You may be thinking etymologically, rather than recognizing how the ve-qatal grammaticalized as a sequential opposition to vayyiqtol and as carrying basically the same TAM as yiqtol. E.g. Gen 29: 1-3. since I didn’t attend the session, I don’t really know what you or he may have meant by ‘free variation’. Hopefully, Jan was referring to a fairly consistent complementary distribution.

Comment on Genesis 1.1 and Topic-fronting before a Wayyiqtol by robertholmstedt

robertholmstedt — Tue, 14 May 2013 16:42:10 +0000

Because we are investigating first “grammar proper” and then only after that discourse conventions. Blurring those lines — indeed, proceeding bass-ackwards by trying to create a “discourse grammar” and then read it back onto syntax-semantics—is what has plagued BH linguistics for, oh, nearly 30 years.

But you expected that answer from me, didn’t you? :-)

Comment on Genesis 1.1 and Topic-fronting before a Wayyiqtol by R B

R B — Tue, 14 May 2013 16:34:25 +0000

>In no case is it syntactically necessary, which is why we suggest it is a pragmatic function of the waw used to facilitate syntactic processing.
Why don’t you call vayyisa and venixrat for the choice that was made? A promotion to main line status. Both had “non-sequential” forms available, but chose the “sequential” gram.

Comment on A little Phoenician by Lamont Conyers

Lamont Conyers — Sat, 04 May 2013 15:14:35 +0000

Dr. Peckham’s book on the Phoenician Script is a classic and an introduction along with Dr. McCarter’s Paleography on the Early and Late Phoenician script which advances our knowledge of the Alphabet in Syria-Palestine.

Comment on Verbs in Habakkuk 3 by johncookvw

johncookvw — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:37:52 +0000

Thanks a lot for the thumbs up! I am hoping to shortly include this information as part of a larger study on the verbal system in poetry.

Comment on Genesis 1.1, again by Gênesis 1.1, outra vez | Adoração e Palavras

Gênesis 1.1, outra vez | Adoração e Palavras — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 22:05:36 +0000

[...] Tradução: Leonardo Felicissimo Fonte: http://ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/genesis-1-1-again/ [...]

Comment on Blogging—should students and pre-tenure faculty do it? In my opinion, no. by Да блогвам или не? | Из чаршията

Да блогвам или не? | Из чаршията — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 08:20:19 +0000

[...] си в полза на блогването и срещу него. Робърт Холмстед се присъединява на страната на критиците, Коментарите под [...]

Comment on Genesis 1.1, again by robertholmstedt

robertholmstedt — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 02:28:58 +0000

It’s good to know that some people can stand it. Many don’t like my models or … just me. :-)

Comment on Genesis 1.1, again by simeon chavel

simeon chavel — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 02:26:39 +0000

BTW, I enjoy your work. :-)