An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

[Page 49] e The need to determine the meaning of linguistic forms through
contextual considerations is an essential by-product of a polysemous semiotic
system. Language itself does much of the work of interpretation for us, in that
language use presupposes a “law of semantic pertinence,” which requires that
semantic entities harmonize in such a way as to make sense together. As the
elements of an utterance follow one another in a temporal string, they screen out
unintended meanings; only by their harmonious meanings do the elements “make
sense.” For example, the word ‘before’ may have temporal or spatial value in the
sentence ‘I sang before Queen Elizabeth.’ In the sentence, ‘I sang before Queen
Elizabeth in Buckingham Palace,’ ‘before’ refers to space; in the sentence, ‘I sang
before Queen Elizabeth addressed parliament,’ ‘before’ refers to time, as it does in
the sentence, ‘I sang before Queen Elizabeth, and after we both had sung we sat
down together for tea.’ Since polysemy and context are essential constituents of
language we assume that contextual determinants are normally available. In the
paradigmatic presentation of a form’s possible meanings, we assume that the
meaning in a given case is clear from other semantic entities in the context. 15
3.3 Levels of Analysis
a Language is made up of a hierarchy of levels. Sounds, words and word elements,
and phrases and clauses are successively more complex levels. The interactions
and structures within each level are different in kind and extent from those on the
other levels. A vowel reduction, for example, is distinct in character from the
formation of a construct phrase. The three levels mentioned are those traditionally
recognized in Western grammar and its successor, modern linguistics. Sounds are
studied under the headings of phonetics and phonology. Morphology treats word
elements and words as grammatical units, in formation (‘ride’ versus ‘rode’),
derivation (‘rider’< ride + er), and inflection (‘riders’< rider + s). Syntax is the
study of higher levels, those of phrases, clauses, sentences, and beyond. The
elements or units are larger on each successive level. 16
b This tripartite division, though traditional, is not ideal either from a linguist’s
point of view or a Semitist’s. The general linguist has two objections. First, the
building blocks or units of phonology are arbitrary: sounds in themselves have no
meaning, and this fact separates the study of sound systems from the study of
other linguistic realities. Second, the analysis of the syntactic domain is difficult:
15 See further R. Meyer, “Gegensinn und Mehrdeutigkeit in der althebräischen Wort-
und Begriffsbildung,” Ugarit-Forschungen 11 (1979) 601–12.
16 The grammarian and linguist tend to follow an ascending order; a schema based on
notional conceptions of language, based on thoughts and ideas rather than perceptible
material, would tend to go in a descending order.