Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Classical Hebrew morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
ducky
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby ducky » Sat Aug 31, 2019 1:50 pm

Hello Karl,

kwrandolph wrote:“Tiberian” is the name of the Hebrew dialect that was spoken around medieval Tiberius when the Masoretes pointed the Tanakh. It was the Tiberian pronunciations that they preserved by their points which reflected also their understanding of the text. Their understanding of the text was also influenced by the Tiberian dialect, so they pointed it according to the grammar of the Tiberian dialect.

Thanks for the information about what is "Tiberian" - It was really needed.
But I don't know how Dialect has to do with something.
There is also the Babylonian Masora with another dialect with a different type of pointing which has the same understanding.
The text was understood like that way before the Tiberian pointed the text.
So I don't know what you're saying. Examples would be nice.

kwrandolph wrote:Conjugation is the forms.

Maybe I am confused with the English terms.
Isn't conjugations are: Qal, Piel, Hiphil and so on?
If so, then qtl and yqtl are not about conjugations - it is about the internal forms of each conjugation.
and that is what we were talking about, weren't we?

kwrandolph wrote:Yes you did, by saying that the question is one of syntax and not grammar.

Karl, I said, "RELATED".
RELATED.
Am I wrong by saying that?
ויברא אלהים את האדם בצלמו
‎בצלם אלהים ברא אותו
Can you switch these verb-forms with each other or not?
No!
Why?
Because the form is related to the syntax.

kwrandolph wrote:Yet you use the participle as a present tense verb in modern Israeli Hebrew. Why then do you call is “weird”?

Because it is weird that they taught you in a Biblical Hebrew course, that the participle is part of the verbal system.
Which, by the way, the Tiberian pointing of the participle is as the nouns' system of pointing and not as the verbs'. So you're blaming the Tiberian for nothing in this case.
What is even weirder is that until now you quoted me on the most insignificant stuff.
very interesting discussion.

And I don't even like the term "present" or not in this case.
The participle is a participle.
While the participle is written, you understand it according to its place.
As coming to describe its subject, and this description can be narrow or wide.
So once again, instead of playing ping-pong with each other, examples would be nice.

kwrandolph wrote:And your current views and reading. It would help if you knew a little more linguistics.

I'll try being better next time.

kwrandolph wrote:The third person masculine singular verb can be pointed as a Qatal Qal, Qatal Piel, or Qal participle. So in sentences where the context indicates that they’re describing present actions, how were they pointed? I haven’t done a study on such sentences, but a survey of such sentences in Tanakh would answer your question.

All I can do is wait for your study.

kwrandolph wrote:In the phrase אבנים שחקו מים both nouns are plural, and the verb is third person plural. There’s no indication that the object should be read first, then the verb, then the subject. So taking the rule that the subject comes first, we get the picture of stones breaking water up into tiny droplets. That’s exactly what happens when waves crash against a rocky shore, or when water in a fast-moving mountain stream slams against rocks. Water doesn’t grindstones. Water moving stones causes stones to grind each other. But stones cause splashing of water, breaking water up into small droplets. And that’s the simple reading of the phrase in Job 14:19.

Indeed simple.
1. Read the context and understand its point.
2. Water does erode/wear stones and rocks.

Karl, If you may, you already know that my linguistic knowledge is not as good as yours. Therefore, I need to see nice examples of the things you say. Just make it simple to me so I can understand. Thanks for your understanding.
David Hunter

kwrandolph
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby kwrandolph » Wed Sep 04, 2019 7:06 pm

ducky wrote:
kwrandolph wrote:Conjugation is the forms.

Maybe I am confused with the English terms.
Isn't conjugations are: Qal, Piel, Hiphil and so on?
If so, then qtl and yqtl are not about conjugations - it is about the internal forms of each conjugation.
and that is what we were talking about, weren't we?


Dear David Hunter

Oy Veh! I thought you said that you had studied up on Biblical Hebrew and its grammar. That you should even ask such a question shows almost total ignorance of Biblical Hebrew and of its grammar. It also shows almost total ignorance of linguistics in general.

Karl W. Randolph.

ducky
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby ducky » Wed Sep 04, 2019 9:24 pm

Hi Karl

Allow me to say LOL.
And once again, LOL.

It took you a week to answer. And it is probably because you searched for a lot of examples for the nonsense you wrote here, but you couldn't.

Then, you also saw your ridiculous interpretation of Job, and probably thought of a way to justify it, but couldn't.

And so, trying to save your honor, you quoted me on... What?
Terms? Really?
Is this what left for you to say after you showed us your magnificent Hebrew knowledge?
Suddenly you don't quote every sentence I wrote?
Strange.

I am not a native English speaker, and I am not sure about English grammar terms.
And you shouldn't "catch" me on that.

But still, I was right even here.
Because we were talking about the qtl and yqtl which they are the forms inside each conjugation.
and when I say "conjugation" I mean בנין.
(And I even got a confirmation in this forum to use that term in that meaning).
So you're "chasing" me for nothing, and you know that, but you must say something to act like you prove me wrong, right?

And the only things you say here, for dozens of times, is "Go and study linguistic" and "You should study more" and "You are ignorant". Sounds to me like a child's talking.
But I don't blame you - This is all that you have left in your tiny pockets

So do yourself a favor. Why don't you disappear again for a week or two and think about something wise to say before you embarrass yourself again.
David Hunter

User avatar
Kirk Lowery
Site Admin
Posts: 297
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 12:03 pm
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby Kirk Lowery » Thu Sep 05, 2019 6:26 am

Okay, this has descended to name calling and slurs. Keep it polite and remember: we are here for enlightenment, not winning a debate or changing other people's minds.
Kirk E. Lowery, PhD
B-Hebrew Site Administrator & Moderator
blog: https://blogs.emdros.org/eh

kwrandolph
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby kwrandolph » Fri Sep 06, 2019 3:46 am

Dear David Hunter:

I have now added a fourth name to my list of people here on this forum whose messages I don’t read, if he starts a thread, I won’t read it. Of course, if he responds to anything I write, I won’t know what he writes and won’t respond to it. That fourth name is David Hunter, aka Ducky.

ducky wrote:I am not a native English speaker, and I am not sure about English grammar terms.
And you shouldn't "catch" me on that.


It is your responsibility at the very least to look those terms up in a dictionary so you don’t misuse them. Or if you’re still unsure after looking them up in a dictionary, ask.

You are not worth my time.

I’m letting you know before hand so that you understand why I don’t respond to you. If you respond to this message, I won’t read it.

Karl W. Randolph.

ducky
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby ducky » Fri Sep 06, 2019 4:45 am

Hello Karl

I'll comment anyway.

1. You shouldn't be so sensitive.

2. If you don't read - what do you gain from that?

3. I did ask for that term, and I was told it fits the meaning of בנין.

4. Too bad that this is your decision. Even though we argue about almost anything, it is still interesting, and I guess we're both sharpening our answers and check things in a way that we wouldn't check it if it weren't for the argument.

5. The fact that I am the fourth guy on your list says something about yourself more than it says about the four guys - Think about it.

6. It seems that you can't handle anyone that doesn't agree with you and what you say. And maybe the best way for you is to open a blog so you can write everything you want without letting anyone respond.

7. As I said, it is a shame that you made that decision, but if you stick to it I wish you the best with your studying.

8. But also remember Proverbs 27:17 ברזל בברזל יחד ואיש יחד פני רעהו
David Hunter

User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby Jason Hare » Fri Sep 06, 2019 4:53 am

ducky wrote:I did ask for that term, and I was told it fits the meaning of בנין.

I think "conjugation" is a perfectly acceptable term for בִּנְיָן.

ducky wrote:But also remember Proverbs 27:17 ברזל בברזל יחד ואיש יחד פני רעהו

בַּרְזֶ֣ל בְּבַרְזֶ֣ל יָ֑חַד וְ֝אִ֗ישׁ יַ֣חַד פְּנֵֽי־רֵעֵֽהוּ׃

We can hope that this will be the state of things here at B-Hebrew, that we can draw in more and fresh contributors, that we can respect each other as coming to Hebrew from different places and different perspectives.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1599
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby Isaac Fried » Fri Sep 06, 2019 6:49 am

I recall that when we were children (meaning little children, now we are grownup children), when getting upset with somebody we used to recite to his face this:
בְּרֹגֶז בְּרֹגֶז לעוֹלם
שוֹלֵם שוֹלֵם אף פעם


Isaac Fried, Boston University

kwrandolph
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby kwrandolph » Fri Sep 06, 2019 5:49 pm

Jason Hare wrote: I think "conjugation" is a perfectly acceptable term for ‫בִּנְ יָן‬.


I don’t know about modern Israeli Hebrew what בנין means there. But here we are speaking English, and the English term “Binyan” refers to the Qal, Niphal, Piel, Pual, Hiphil, Hophal, Hitpael. The English term “conjugation” refers to Qatal and Yiqtol. In Mishnaic Hebrew, possibly before but definitely later, when, according to Waltke & O’Connor, Qatal had been repurposed for past tense, participle repurposed from a noun to present tense verb and Yiqtol had been repurposed to future tense. “Conjugation” refers to the forms that in Mishnaic Hebrew and later were used for tense. “Conjugation” refers to the same forms in Biblical Hebrew, even though they don’t indicate tense in Biblical Hebrew.

Karl W. Randolph.

User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Is this a defective feminine plural, or what?

Postby Jason Hare » Fri Sep 06, 2019 6:24 pm

When dealing with Latin, we have four conjugations, which are simply patterns that group verbs according to how they take endings. We can appropriately refer to the qal conjugation or the niphal conjugation in the same way that Latin has both third-conjugation -iō verbs (such as capiō, capere) and fourth-conjugation -io verbs (such as audiō, audīre).

Hebrew conjugations may take on different shapes depending on the roots, but they are still conjugations. We tend to use the word נְטִיָּה for "conjugation," meaning that it is the way a verb "tends" in its different forms. There is surely no problem with understanding בִּנְיָן in the sense of "conjugation."

We might, on the other hand, refer to the perfect conjugation or the imperfect conjugation within a binyan, but there's no reason to argue about such terminology. If we want to use the appropriate terminology, we should use Hebrew. However, there's no reason to jump on someone for using English approximate translations to the Hebrew terms.
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian


Return to “Classical Hebrew Language & Linguistics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests