sblarose wrote:normansimonr wrote:…I'm studying with the SBL textbook, but it's discussion of this topic is a bit messy, and I got lost soon.
Is the SBL textbook online so we can get an idea of what it teaches? As it is, I’m unfamiliar with it.
I’m doing research and writing concerning Biblical Hebrew, but don’t know of a single textbook that I could recommend should I get a chance to teach the language.
sblarose wrote:I am not familiar with the SBL Hebrew textbook. I can talk to you about the way I teach verbs to beginning students. The most important thing I can say to you is that Hebrew understanding often does not translate directly to English expressions.
That is so true. Yet we understand enough of it so that we get all the main points.
sblarose wrote:My personal opinion is that Hebrew verbs communicate both time and aspect depending on the situation in which they are used.
See below.
sblarose wrote:In a basic narrative, the Qatal presents both past tense and completed action.
So much of Tanakh is history, hence all verbal forms are used refer to past and completed events. There’s nothing special about Qatal in this regard.
sblarose wrote:… In the Prov 31 passage, for example, the verbs communicate aspect because the hypothetical woman is presented as doing these things and being in this character always (completed action).
I don’t understand this claim. All the verbs in this section refer to present (tense) and continuing (aspect) action. There’s no difference.
sblarose wrote:But this is not a situation that requires an English past-tense translation. So I encourage students to understand the Hebrew concept as well as the best English translation required.
HTH!
The last time I read Tanakh through, I decided I would list all quoted conversations where:
1) it was unquestionably referring to present and continuing action.
2) there is no question as to which verbal form used (using an unpointed text—the consonantal text has the same letters for the third person singular in both the Qal Qatal and Qal participle, so those had to be omitted from the survey). Of course, verbless clauses don’t fit.
3) it had to be in conversation, not poetry nor general narrative.
4) it had to be nominative mood.
In spite of all these restrictions, I was surprised at how many recorded conversations I found in Tanakh.
By far, the most common verb that met all criteria is ידע and the most common conjugation is Qatal.
Where there is any question on whether or not present actions were referenced, I omitted them from the survey. That included many conversations where either present or recently completed action was indicated.
How does this affect our understanding of Biblical Hebrew verbal usage?
I should have, but haven’t, listed conversations where future action was indicated, nominative mood. While just reading, I noticed several such conversations where the verb is either participle or Qatal, where it appears that Qatal is more common. Many conversations referring to future action are not in nominative mood, rather in moods indicated by the Yiqtol conjugation, so that has to be taken into account.
Why target conversations? I figure that written Hebrew in general follows the same rules as conversational Hebrew. So if we can understand verbal use in conversations, we then can understand verbal use in poetry and narrative as well.
Karl W. Randolph.