Is this the way to study grammar?

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.
User avatar
Ben Putnam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:08 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by Ben Putnam »

No, I do believe it is possible, as I am developing such a feel for BH myself, and my current feel for the language is nothing compared to others' like those at the Biblical Language Center. I simply question whether one has developed such a feel, such that they can elevate themselves above others, when their own paradigm predicts non-language or otherwise incorrect BH which does not fit the data, as I know yours has in past discussions on the B-Hebrew list.
Ben Putnam
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by kwrandolph »

Ben:

So you agree that it’s possible to develop a feel for the language, even though we’re not talking about native speaking fluency?

Further response below.
Ben Putnam wrote:No, I do believe it is possible, as I am developing such a feel for BH myself, and my current feel for the language is nothing compared to others' like those at the Biblical Language Center. I simply question whether one has developed such a feel, such that they can elevate themselves above others, when their own paradigm predicts non-language or otherwise incorrect BH which does not fit the data, as I know yours has in past discussions on the B-Hebrew list.
I don’t think I elevate myself above other beyond what David did in Psalm 119:99, and for the same reason. It’s not me who is elevated, rather Tanakh and the one who authored it.

What paradigm am I working from that predicts incorrect BH? Which is the incorrect BH? Please list it. What “non-language” are you talking about and how does it affect BH? What data contradict what I have said so far, where I have stated a conclusion rather than a tentative discussion issue? Unlike some others on this list, I have no ax to grind, no special theories to push, some of the conclusions I’ve come to have been the result of discussions on this list. Others, such as the question that started this thread, started out from recognition that some of what I’d learned in class was not supported by the text, one of which being the recognition that BH doesn’t conjugate for time—neither tense nor aspect (“aspect” using the traditional definition as being a measure of time).

You’ve made some serious allegations above, so now I ask you to back them up. If I am wrong, and I have been in the past and have admitted to those that I recognize, please inform us so that we all may learn and improve our knowledge of BH. But I request this much, if you claim that I’ve misrepresented BH, please demonstrate it through references to Bible verses that show where I’ve made mistakes. I personally won’t accept it if it’s merely on the basis of others’ theories, I need to see the raw data.

Karl W. Randolph.
User avatar
Ben Putnam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:08 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by Ben Putnam »

Example:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-he ... 47059.html

Not looking to pick a fight or anything similar; just noting an inconsistency.
Ben Putnam
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by kwrandolph »

Ben:
Ben Putnam wrote:Example:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-he ... 47059.html

Not looking to pick a fight or anything similar; just noting an inconsistency.
I already answered that message:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-he ... 47062.html

You also didn’t mention that the message you linked to above was Dr. Buth’s last message that he posted. He has not been back since.

Karl W. Randolph.
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by kwrandolph »

Addendum to the above message:

There were at least two more messages in the above thread, but they were not archived at the ibiblio b-hebrew archives. The last one is where I stated that the reason Dr. Buth made so many mistakes was because he doesn’t know Bible.But because that message was not archived, I can’t prove it from the ibiblio archives. Looking at the message numbers shows that there are messages missing.

After posting the above message, I went back and looked at some other messages and threads in which I had participated, and found more messages missing. So now I can confidently say that what we have here is not the whole picture.

Karl W. Randolph.
User avatar
Ben Putnam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:08 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by Ben Putnam »

Just because you replied doesn't mean you answered the points. It wasn't his last message on B-Hebrew as you claim, but it does appear that it was nearly the last. In any case, what does that even matter? He participated on the list for years and during that time went round and round with you, and I can't say that I really blame him for not posting more... Your statements about him not knowing Bible or Biblical Hebrew are an attack as well, and a very uninformed one at that. But any careful reader who is interested can go back into the archives and judge for themselves. I for one am not buying what you are selling. But no matter. I'm not interested in continuing this discussion, as I don't see any positives coming out of it. Have a good day.
Ben Putnam
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by kwrandolph »

Ben:
Ben Putnam wrote:Just because you replied doesn't mean you answered the points.
In looking up some background info for this thread, I noticed that there seemed to be messages missing from the archive at ibiblio. Further checking showed even more missing data. Therefore, use of the archives to verify or falsify whether or not his points were answered cannot be done, except where extent messages specifically answer the points.

By the way, Dr. Buth disagreed with one of my claims, but never, ever provided the raw data, despite my repeated asking for them, that could verify or falsify either my claim or his rejection thereof.
Ben Putnam wrote: It wasn't his last message on B-Hebrew as you claim, but it does appear that it was nearly the last.
Didn’t you see my addendum posting?
Ben Putnam wrote: In any case, what does that even matter? He participated on the list for years and during that time went round and round with you, and I can't say that I really blame him for not posting more... Your statements about him not knowing Bible or Biblical Hebrew are an attack as well, and a very uninformed one at that. But any careful reader who is interested can go back into the archives and judge for themselves. I for one am not buying what you are selling. But no matter. I'm not interested in continuing this discussion, as I don't see any positives coming out of it. Have a good day.
During that time I was able to document errors that he made, documented by pointing to specific verses that contradicted his claims. Sometimes listing Bible verses was all my answer, without comment. I don’t remember how many of his errors that I caught that way. If he had known Hebrew Bible, would he have made those errors?

One of his central errors was his claim that conversational, indicative, present tense sayings are comprised of subject, verb in participle, optional object. He claimed that this is the default pattern. He claimed that the use of the participle indicates present tense. I documented the use of the participle in conversation for future, and since then I’ve noticed more verses for both future and past. Therefore, the use of the participle is not a marker for the present tense.

This last time reading Tanakh through in Hebrew, I decided I’d record all the indicative, present tense conversations I notice as I read. So far I have found many more conversations than I remembered existing, and the majority have a subject, verb in Qatal, then optional object. I have also found many more conversations using the participle than what were mentioned in the messages online, but they are fewer than those where the verb is in Qatal. Would Dr. Buth have made such an error, if he knew Hebrew Bible?

My first reaction to this clam by Dr. Buth was based on a seat-of-the-pants feeling that it didn’t sound right. But that seat-of-the-pants feeling was based on familiarity with the Hebrew Bible.

Now I will scold you personally a little—this forum is supposed to be one where Biblical Hebrew language and literature are discussed, without referring to people. Everyone makes mistakes, myself included, myself especially after learning that so much that I learned in class turned out to be wrong, so I’m questioning almost everything. I came to certain conclusions concerning the meanings of Biblical Hebrew verbal conjugations, but now am questioning those based on further reading. The patterns appear to be more complex than what I initially posited. So let’s deal with these ideas, rather than getting all uptight that I disagree with some icon of modern scholarship. I don’t think I’ve attacked Dr. Buth personally, other than that his ideas that he presented show unfamiliarity with the Hebrew Bible.

So let’s get back to discussing Biblical Hebrew.

Karl W. Randolph.
User avatar
Ben Putnam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:08 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by Ben Putnam »

There are several false assumptions and erroneous claims here, both linguistic and personal, but that's fine. Let's drop it as I originally suggested.

ברכות
Ben Putnam
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Is this the way to study grammar?

Post by kwrandolph »

Ben Putnam wrote:There are several false assumptions and erroneous claims here, both linguistic and personal, but that's fine.
No it’s not fine. If there are errors, document them. If you don’t, then what you have done is to present baseless personal attacks.

If there are linguistic errors, they need to be corrected, not just left hanging out there to corrupt others, and leave me uncorrected. Unless someone can demonstrate some errors that I make, I’ll continue to make them, showing others why they should be followed.

As for ibiblio b-hebrew archives, the missing numbers already show deleted messages. So you can’t depend on the archive to back up your claims. Therefore, if you make claims, you need to back them up yourself.
Ben Putnam wrote: Let's drop it as I originally suggested.

ברכות
Yes, you may drop it, but recognize that as you do so, you admit that your earlier claims were baseless personal attacks.

Karl W. Randolph.
Post Reply