I see that Schniedewind and Hunt don't talk about a 'subjunctive' but a 
'volitive' for the yaqtula form in Ugaritic. That certainly fits better with 
the Hebrew cohortative (which is found in both the first _and third_ person in 
the OT, Rolf, as you know). Perhaps then in North-West Semitic the yaqtula form 
performed a rather different function to the Arabic. That would tie in better 
with what Rolf reports of Krahmalkov's position (I find his grammar frankly 
confusing but a copy happens to be at hand).

John Leake

----------------------------------
ان صاحب حياة هانئة لا يدونها انما يحياها
He who has a comfortable life doesn't write about it - he lives it
---------------------------------- 

On 30 May 2013, at 09:20, John Leake <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jonathan, I at least was speaking about _forms_ of the prefix verb that are 
> most clearly found in Classical Arabic and other West Semitic languages. In 
> Arabic the three forms of the prefix verb are:
> yaqtulu - the basic form traditionally called the indicative mood
> yaqtula - traditionally called the subjunctive mood
> yaqtul - traditionally called the jussive mood
> 
> Arab grammarians call all three moods collectively المضارع /al-muDāri'/  'the 
> similar'. Individually they are المضارع المرفوع 'the similar ending in -u', 
> المضارع المنصوب 'the accusative similar' (both forms generally end in -a) and 
> المضارع المجزوم 'the apocopated similar'. 
> 
> In function, the subjunctive mood works following certain particles that give 
> the verb a meaning of potentiality:
> 
> 'that' أن /'an/
> 'in order' لِـ /li-/ كَيْ /kay/
> and combinations of the above.
> 'until' حتى /Hattā/
> 'will not' لن /lan/
> 
> The jussive is used as a first and third-person imperative (more rarely as a 
> polite second person imperative) with the particle لِـ /li-/ (I incorrectly 
> wrote /la/ on a previous post). It is also used with the negative particle لم 
> /lam/ as a negative equivalent of the perfect (suffix tense). And it is used 
> in the same way as the perfect in the apostasis of a conditional sentence.
> 
> There's also an energetic jussive used for commands, in Arabic always after 
> the negative particle لا 'not' also used with the imperative. It is a 
> modification of the jussive appending /-n/ or /-nna/. Rather like נא after a 
> cohortative of jussive, I suppose.
> 
> The suffix form, incidentally, they call الماضي 'the carried out, the 
> accomplished' (the Latin perfectum is about right).
> 
> John Leake
> 
> ----------------------------------
> ان صاحب حياة هانئة لا يدونها انما يحياها
> He who has a comfortable life doesn't write about it - he lives it
> ---------------------------------- 
> 
> On 30 May 2013, at 06:48, Jonathan Mohler <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> To all who have contributed to this discussion:
>> 
>> I would like to add my own contribution, but before I do so I would like us 
>> to define the difference if any between subjunctive and jussive.  This is a 
>> source of confusion for me, even after four years of Greek and Hebrew.  I 
>> recently worked through Robert Chisholm's workbook on Jonah and Ruth.  
>> Chisholm often uses the expression "this imperfect is jussive in meaning."  
>> I suppose he means the form is imperfect, but the pragmatic use is jussive.  
>> I would prefer if he just called the form a yiqtol or wayyiqtol.  
>> 
>> As to the issue with the subjunctive, I have never heard a clear definition 
>> by an English speaking teacher.  Does subjunctive refer to form or function? 
>> I was raised in the French part of Belgium. I took Dutch as a second 
>> language and German as a third.  As an adult I spent 12 years in Kenya, 
>> where I learned Swahili and Luyia.  I speak English, French and Swahili 
>> natively, and the others conversationally.  Every one of these languages 
>> uses subjunctive to express a jussive.  For this reason I think I am 
>> confused as to the difference between the two.
>> 
>> Jonathan E Mohler
>> Baptist Bible Graduate School
>> Springfield, Missouri, US
>> 
>> 
>> On May 29, 2013, at 11:00 AM, John Leake wrote:
>> 
>>> Indeed, Krahmalkov maintains that the tripartite distinction between 
>>> indicative, subjunctive and jussive was strictly maintained in Phoenician, 
>>> and that this continued into Neo-Punic. In the last phases of Punic the 
>>> subjunctive was orthographically represented, but the subjunctive and 
>>> jussive were always distinguishable from the indicative since Phoenician 
>>> maintained the final nun of the 2nd and 3rd persons plural in the 
>>> indicative prefix form)
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

Reply via email to