03.04.2013 Views

An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

should primary attention be given <strong>to</strong> phrases or <strong>to</strong> clauses and sentences or <strong>to</strong><br />

larger chunks of material (i.e., discourses or texts)? Only study of larger chunks<br />

allows us <strong>to</strong> explain, for example, aspects of time reference and narration or<br />

rhe<strong>to</strong>rical functions (e.g., linguistic expressions of subservience or sarcasm).<br />

c The Semitist’s objections point <strong>to</strong> the same problem areas as the general<br />

linguist’s do, but for different reasons. First, the traditional understanding of<br />

morphology is based [Page 50] on combining sequences of word elements, as in<br />

English ‘bridesmaids’ < [[[bride + POSSESSIVE] + maid] + PLURAL]. <strong>Hebrew</strong>,<br />

like the other Semitic languages, uses vowel patterns as much as sequential<br />

combinations, and therefore its morphology is more diverse. In particular, its<br />

morphology is often closely intertwined with the phonology, in ways that the<br />

traditional account does not allow for. Second, the Semitist notes, the domain of<br />

language above the phrase level is much harder <strong>to</strong> subdivide in <strong>Hebrew</strong> and the<br />

other Semitic languages than the traditional formula recognizes. The sentence, for<br />

example, is difficult <strong>to</strong> isolate and define, and thus Semitic grammars tend <strong>to</strong> treat<br />

clauses at great length, with some reference <strong>to</strong> a few clear types of complex<br />

sentences.<br />

d Despite these two sets of objections, the tripartite division is a useful scheme, still<br />

recognized by all grammarians as a convenient and sometimes revealing<br />

framework. We discuss the three basic levels mentioned and then turn briefly <strong>to</strong><br />

work done on a discourse or text level. At the end of this review we take up some<br />

approaches that cut across linguistic levels and reveal their commonality.<br />

3.3.1 Sounds<br />

a The most basic system of the linguistic code involves the sounds themselves. A<br />

sound produced by the vocal tract may be called a phone, and the sounds are<br />

studied in themselves in the science of phonetics. Of greater interest <strong>to</strong> the linguist<br />

is the set of sounds actually used in a given language, the set of phonemes, and the<br />

ways in which they are used; the set of these usage patterns is called the<br />

phonology of a language, as is the study of the patterns.<br />

b A phoneme is a sound or speech unit that makes a difference, that is, it can<br />

distinguish one word from another. The English words ‘pit’ and ‘pin’ differ only<br />

in the final sounds, the t and n; thus, we say t and n are phonemes in English. The<br />

word pair ‘bit’ and ‘pit’ shows that b and p are phonemes of English; such a pair<br />

is called a minimal pair. For many speakers of American English ‘pen’ and ‘pin’<br />

are distinct, and for those speakers the two vowels E and I are phonemic. For<br />

many others, however, ‘pen’ and ‘pin’ sound alike, and only the I vowel is used.<br />

Note that these speakers use the I vowel in words such as ‘rent,’ ‘sent,’ and<br />

‘went,’ where the first group of speakers uses the vowel of ‘pen’; there is no

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!