Dear Rolf: On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 3:58 AM, Rolf Furuli <[email protected]> wrote:
> … . By analyzing all the verbs of the Tanakh by these three parameters, I > found that tense is not grammaticalized in Hebrew; and I found that > Hebrew has aspects and how these aspects differ from the aspects in > English and other aspectual languages. Oh oh, it looks like you are using an idiosyncratic definition for “aspect” that no one else uses. Would you care to explain yourself? I use the definition from SIL “Aspect is a grammatical category associated with verbs<http://www-01.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOflinguisticTerms/WhatIsAVerbLinguistics.htm> that expresses a temporal view of the event or state expressed by the verb.” which leads me to the conclusion that Biblical Hebrew doesn’t conjugate for aspect. Isn’t it better to invent a new term for an observed phenomena than to repurpose an established term in an idiosyncratic way? By doing that, wouldn’t you avoid misunderstanding? Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
