Dear Karl,
I do not want to continue this discussion. But this is my last
attempt to explain "aspect" as I understand the term.
I start with an example from lexical semantics. Lexical meaning of a
Hebrew word is not found in Hebrew-English lexicons, but in the mind
of people who spoke Hebrew. The letters of a written word or the
sounds of a word do not have any meaning. But they signal a concept
in the minds of native speakers. This concept is rather broad; it has
a rather clear nucleus, but becomes more fuzzy toward the edges.
Take for example the Hebrew word NP$ (soul). In the Tanakh it may
denote people, animals, and even carcasses. It may also signal
abstract properties, such as life, or even the right to live as a
being. All these references and senses, and several more, were
included in the concept NP$ in the minds of the native speakers. When
NP$ was used in a clause, the word COULD express all these references
and senses. But the author wanted to make only one of them visible
for his audience. In order to achieve this, he formed his context.
The context does not generate any new lexical meaning, but it makes
visible a part of the meaning potential of each word. For example, in
Genesis 1:20, the context shows that NP$ refers to sea creatures. All
the other possible references and meanings are not visible.
A clause expresses action(s) or state(s). The principal part of the
clause is the verb, and a verb has a great meaning potential. When an
author chooses a verb, he considers its lexical meaning. The concept
signaled by a verb has a potential of senses, and the author uses the
context to make visible one sense of this potential; all the others
are kept invisible. The author wants to show the reader when the
action occurred, past, present, or future, and in Hebrew, it is the
context that makes visible one temporal references and keeps the
others invisible. If the action occurred in the past, objectively
speaking, the action is completed. But the author may want to stress
a certain part of the action in the eyes of the reader. For example,
he may want to make visible for the reader that an action in the past
started at a certain point and continued. Or he may want to make
visible that an action was attempted, but not carried through. Which
linguistic means did a Hebrew writer have to achieve this? Please
look at 1) and 2) below:
1) Exodus 33:4 NIV: "When the people heard (WAYYIQTOL) these
distressing words, they began to mourn (WAYYIQTOL)."
The English translation of 1) makes visible an ingressive event: The
starting point, and a part of the continuation of the action is made
visible. The event is past and it was completed, but the end of this
past event is not made visible for the reader. In English, the
linguistic tools used, is the lexical meaning of "began" and an
infinitive. In Hebrew, only one finite verb is used. The core of the
lexical meaning of )BL is "mourn," and, as mentioned, the context
shows that the action was completed at the time of writing. The tool
used to make the ingressive meaning visible, is the imperfective
WAYYIQTOL. This shows that that aspect has nothing to do with the
action itself; aspect does not contribute anything the meaning of the
objective action(s). But aspect is a subjective property that is used
to make one part of (or the whole) action visible. If we take "time"
into our discussion, the aspect tells us nothing about the temporal
reference of the actions (past, present, or future). But in 1), the
aspect makes visible a part of the event time (event time=the time
from the beginning to the end of the event), namely, the beginning
and a small part of the action. Moreover, the aspect makes visible
the details of the actions during this time, namely, a continuation
of mourning.
2) " Kings 6:4 NIV: "And they went (WAYYIQTOL) with him. They went
(WAYYIQTOL) to the Jordan, and began to cut down (WAYYIQTOL) trees."
This example is similar to the one above. To make the beginning and a
small part of the cutting action in this completed event, visible,
the imperfective WAYYIQTOL is used.
In 3) and 4) below, we see a typical imperfective situation: an event
occurs inside a state.
3) "While Tim was sleeping, Ann arrived."
4) Genesis 2:21NIV: "and while he was sleeping (WAYYIQTOL), he took
one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh."
Example 3) is a typical English example of an imperfective situation.
The present participle makes visible a part of the state of sleeping
after the beginning and before the end, and neither beginning nor end
is made visible. Example 4) is similar: A part of Adam's sleep is
made visible, but not the beginning and end. An imperfective
WWAYYIQTOL is used to make a part of a state visible, while keeping
the beginning and end invisible.
The tools to make conative events visible, is the lexical meaning of
the verb, the imperfective aspect, and our knowledge of the world
(the context shows that the event was only attempted.
Best regards,
Rolf Furuli
Rolf:
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Rolf Furuli
<<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Karl,
The SIL definition of the aspect is:
"Aspect is a grammatical category associated with verbs that
expresses a temporal view of the event or state expressed by the
verb."
I accept the definition, but it is so vague that it tells nothing.
I think the meaning was fleshed out, clarified in the subcategories
linked to from the main definition.
Please look at the definitions I have given previously:
"TENSE represents deictic time, which means that it is the
relationship between reference time and the deictic center (C).
The deictic center is in most cases speech time. An event whose
reference time comes before (C) is past; when reference time comes
after C, the event is future; when reference time coincides with C,
the event is present.
The definition applies to languages that have grammaticalized tenses.
As I understand it, this gives the same meaning as I meant with my
reference to the time line.
ASPECT represents non-deictic time, which means that the time of the
aspect is not seen in relation to a deictic center. Aspect is the
relationship between event time and reference time. In order to
apply the definition, one must get a clear understanding of what
"reference time" and "event time" are.
This definition I find a little bit vague.
However, you do agree that 'aspect' refers to time, just that it is
a different measurement of time than tense.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
