Yeah. I figure whatever comes of this, what those of you who know this stuff decide will be of benefit to those of us who have only scratched the surface.

Alternative Hebrew Aspect selections
#21
Posted 12 October 2014 - 05:23 PM
Julia Falling
13" MacBook Pro Catalina Accordance 13
mid-2017 3.5 GHz Intel Core i7 (2 cores)
16 GB RAM;
512 GB SSD
iPad Pro (9.7") iPadOS 13
128 GB
iAccord 3
iPhone 11 iOS 13
128 GB
iAccord 3
Used for backup only:
Mac mini Catalina Accordance 13
late-2012 2.3GHz Intel Core i7 (4 cores)
16 GB RAM; 1.12 TB Fusion Drive
#22
Posted 12 October 2014 - 05:45 PM
Ken,
Neither John nor I advocate a departure from the WLC tags, just a surface level name change for the Accordance interface. We're both too familiar with tagged database to suggest any significant change to the WLC tagging (which I'm sure they wouldn't want, anyway).
With that said, they've accepted dozens of my submitted corrections. I believe my name is somewhere in the notes to the last release they produced. :-) And I have a couple dozen more I'll submit at the end of this year.
- Tony Pyles likes this
Dept. of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations
The University of Toronto
blog: ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com
https://utoronto.aca...RobertHolmstedt
#23
Posted 12 October 2014 - 08:20 PM
the ones I cave come across are not for the binyanim but for the aspect (which would normally be dubbed perfect, imperfect, waw-consecutive, infinitive construct, infinitive absolute, imperative, etc etc).
I don’t like Seow’s grammar personally, but I do like the descriptive terms he uses.
I see what you mean, now. I do think those terms are become more popular in articles, grammars, and some commentaries.
Yeah, as a teaching grammar Seow is pedagogically weak (in my opinion), but I think it can be a nice reference tool.
חַפְּשׂוּ בַּתּוֹרָה הֵיטֵב וְאַל תִּסְתַּמְּכוּ עַל דְּבָרַי
Currently running Accordance on:
Windows 10 (64bit)
FRNX Series (2015)
Core i7-4710 MQ CPU @ 2.50GHz
#24
Posted 12 October 2014 - 11:44 PM
Ken,
Neither John nor I advocate a departure from the WLC tags, just a surface level name change for the Accordance interface. We're both too familiar with tagged database to suggest any significant change to the WLC tagging (which I'm sure they wouldn't want, anyway).
With that said, they've accepted dozens of my submitted corrections. I believe my name is somewhere in the notes to the last release they produced. :-) And I have a couple dozen more I'll submit at the end of this year.
Thanks Prof Holmstedt, just making sure
Ken
Lead Australian Accordance Demonstrator
Administrator, Accordance Exchange
Assistant Minister, Summer Hill Church
#25
Posted 13 October 2014 - 07:20 AM
Let’s return to the more edifying area of Hebrew grammatical taxonomy! (BTW - completely mea culpa)
Amen!
Edited by bkMitchell, 13 October 2014 - 07:20 AM.
חַפְּשׂוּ בַּתּוֹרָה הֵיטֵב וְאַל תִּסְתַּמְּכוּ עַל דְּבָרַי
Currently running Accordance on:
Windows 10 (64bit)
FRNX Series (2015)
Core i7-4710 MQ CPU @ 2.50GHz
#26
Posted 13 October 2014 - 09:59 AM
What I would like to see used is the simple Letter-Number System, like G10, G11, G12, etc.; N10, N11, N12, etc.;
D10, D11, D12, etc.
G = qal (mnemonic "ground form")
N = nifal
D = piel (mnemonic doubling dot)
Was this invented by William LaSor?
I could not find a chart laying it out by google -- if anyone knows a link to it, I would be thankful for posting it.
It can be seen used in Google books on a page which is designated p. 46 in the Google system, but 47a in the book as "photographed," "Verb Diagnosis Chart" in Willam LaSor: Handbook of Biblical Hebrew
http://books.google....Sor g10&f=false
Edited by Enoch, 13 October 2014 - 10:04 AM.
#27
Posted 13 October 2014 - 12:34 PM
Hi Enoch,
If I recall, Gleason Archer told his 1986 Aramaic class at TEDS that he invented this alpha-numeric parsing system. Since LaSor's Handbook came out in 78/79, he probably learned it from Archer when their times overlapped at Fuller Theological Seminary. I'm open to correction though.
For the layout, see the attached file.
[Edit: Sorry about the misaligned vowel points and cells in the original pdf file; I replaced it with a screenshot.]
2nd Edit: I found and attached LaSor's Table of Indicators, Handbook:2, p. 90.]
One advantage of adopting it in Accordance would be to combine the neutral terms qatal, yiqtol, etc. with the rest of the parsing information - e.g., qatal G12, or yiqtol Dp 22. So I would also like to see it.
However, even though it would be relatively easy for Accordance to program this, I doubt that there would be much interest in it. I doubt that many have even heard of it.
If I had to choose between Accordance offering qatal, yiqtol, etc. and the alpha-numeric parsing system as options, I would choose the former.
Regards,
Michel
Attached Files
Edited by Michel Gilbert, 13 October 2014 - 04:25 PM.
#28
Posted 13 October 2014 - 01:54 PM
What I would like to see used is the simple Letter-Number System, like G10, G11, G12, etc.; N10, N11, N12, etc.;
D10, D11, D12, etc.
G = qal (mnemonic "ground form")
N = nifal
D = piel (mnemonic doubling dot)
Was this invented by William LaSor?
I could not find a chart laying it out by google -- if anyone knows a link to it, I would be thankful for posting it.
It can be seen used in Google books on a page which is designated p. 46 in the Google system, but 47a in the book as "photographed," "Verb Diagnosis Chart" in Willam LaSor: Handbook of Biblical Hebrew
Intriguing - I've never seen anyone use that stem system for Hebrew before. I usually associate it with Akkadian and Ugaritic - maybe Archer used the system in order to match the terminology used in comparative semitic linguistics?
Actually, that gives me an idea. Other than an alternative to the aspects (perfect/imperfect versus qatal/yiqtol etc.) in Preferences, it would be great if it were possible to select an alternative to the current stem system (qal, nifal etc.) as well so that:
Qal becomes G-stem (Grundstamm)
Nifal becomes N-stem
Piel becomes D-stem (Doppelungsstamm)
Hifil becomes H-stem (Equals Akkadian causative Š-stem)
Qal passive becomes Gp-stem
..and so on.
With kind regards
Pchris
Hardware: MacBook Pro 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7 (medio 2012)
Operating System: OSX 10.9.5 Mavericks.
#29
Posted 13 October 2014 - 02:20 PM
I would support using the basic abbreviations G, N, D, H, etc. for the binyanim. But the numerical codes (10, 11, etc.) are, as far as I know, from the CCATS electronic text that preceded the current morphological databases. I would never recommend them for students learning the language, since they remove one to a level of abstraction that obscures the function of the forms (i.e, G10) for Qal 3ms qatal verb.
- Peter Brylov Christensen likes this
Dept. of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations
The University of Toronto
blog: ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com
https://utoronto.aca...RobertHolmstedt
#30
Posted 13 October 2014 - 02:24 PM
Here I will demur with Robert, for the simple reason that the alphabetic abbreviations G, N, D, H, etc. will never reach the level of differentiation currently in the Accordance search engine, and will be practically impossible to apply (take a look at the pull down menu to see the wide variation of binyanim listed both for Hebrew and Aramaic). So while nice in theory, I can't see it begin usefully applied to the database.
- Peter Brylov Christensen likes this
Professor of Old Testament
and Director of Hebrew Language Instruction
Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, KY
ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com
#31
Posted 13 October 2014 - 02:33 PM
Intriguing - I've never seen anyone use that stem system for Hebrew before. I usually associate it with Akkadian and Ugaritic - maybe Archer used the system in order to match the terminology used in comparative semitic linguistics?
Dr. Archer told us he knew about 24 languages. His memorial at http://www.etsjets.o...13-220_JETS.pdf says he knew about 30 before he passed away, and that he taught NT Greek, biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, Akkadian, Egyptian, and Syriac.
Now that you mention it, he did introduce the system in the context of the semitic languages.
Regards
Edited by Michel Gilbert, 13 October 2014 - 02:54 PM.
- Peter Brylov Christensen likes this
#32
Posted 13 October 2014 - 02:38 PM
Hi Enoch,
If I recall, Gleason Archer told his 1986 Aramaic class at TEDS that he invented this alpha-numeric parsing system. Since LaSor's Handbook came out in 78/79, he probably learned it from Archer when their times overlapped at Fuller Theological Seminary. I'm open to correction though.
For the layout, see the attached file.
[Edit: Sorry about the misaligned vowel points and cells in the original pdf file; I replaced it with a screenshot.]
One advantage of adopting it in Accordance would be to combine the neutral terms qatal, yiqtol, etc. with the rest of the parsing information - e.g., qatal G12, or yiqtol Dp 22. So I would also like to see it.
However, even though it would be relatively easy for Accordance to program this, I doubt that there would be much interest in it. I doubt that many have even heard of it.
If I had to choose between Accordance offering qatal, yiqtol, etc. and the alpha-numeric parsing system as options, I would choose the former.
Regards,
Michel
Thanks. I learned of this system from Kenneth Barker at TEDS long before 1986 -- Archer was there, but I never took a course from him. Barker I ranks as one the all time best profs I ever had. I don't recall him saying Archer invented it, but I might have missed it. Barker was a Dropsie student at the time.
BTW, I think everyone is neglecting the contribution towards Bible Code that these alpha-numerics could make. Secret messages could be deciphered.
Edited by Enoch, 13 October 2014 - 03:20 PM.
#33
Posted 13 October 2014 - 03:12 PM
Here I will demur with Robert, for the simple reason that the alphabetic abbreviations G, N, D, H, etc. will never reach the level of differentiation currently in the Accordance search engine, and will be practically impossible to apply (take a look at the pull down menu to see the wide variation of binyanim listed both for Hebrew and Aramaic). So while nice in theory, I can't see it begin usefully applied to the database.
You're right, John -- I didn't think about all the others listed in the Accordance menu until after I had posted. But what's Aramaic, anyway?
- Peter Brylov Christensen likes this
Dept. of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations
The University of Toronto
blog: ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com
https://utoronto.aca...RobertHolmstedt
#34
Posted 13 October 2014 - 03:27 PM
Hi,
When I mentioned the stems in my screenshot, "G, N, D, Dp, H, Hp, HtD (there are others)," I knew that it would be difficult to abbreviate most of the others, and that would be a deal breaker.
So, even though I would like it, I'm not advocating for the system. I'd much rather have the qatal, yiqtol option.
By the way Robert, would you advocate qetol for impv, and qotel/qatul for the ptc?
- Peter Brylov Christensen likes this
#35
Posted 13 October 2014 - 05:01 PM
Hi,
When I mentioned the stems in my screenshot, "G, N, D, Dp, H, Hp, HtD (there are others)," I knew that it would be difficult to abbreviate most of the others, and that would be a deal breaker.
So, even though I would like it, I'm not advocating for the system. I'd much rather have the qatal, yiqtol option.
By the way Robert, would you advocate qetol for impv, and qotel/qatul for the ptc?
I tried to give it a go anyway. Some of the forms I'm not sure of, so feel free to correct me:
Qal—> G
Passive Qal —> Gp (G passive)
Nifal—> N
Piel—> D
Pual—> Dp
Hitpael —> tD
Hotpaal—> tDp (Passive hitpael)
Hifil—> H (Akkadian Š-stem)
Hištafel —> Št-stem
Hofal —> Hp (Hifil passive)
Poel —> LD (Biconsonantal verbal stem with lengthened second radical - factitive)
Poal —> LDp (Biconsonantal verbal stem with lengthened second radical - passive factitive)
Hitpoel—> LtD (Biconsonantal verbal stem with lengthened second radical - factitive reflexive)
Polel —> Hollow LD verbal stem
Pilel —> ? (Accordance states that there are three forms of this verb in the BHS: Ezek 28,23; Psa 88,17; Job 26,9. HALOT lists the form in Ex 28,23 as a Pilpel. The form in Psa 88,17 is listed as a piel. The form in Job 26,9 is listed as a mixed form of two verbs.)
Palel —> ? (Accordance states that there are seven forms of this verb in the BHS: Gen 21,16; Jer 30,10; 46,27; 48,11; Job 3,18; 15,32; Prov 1,33. HALOT lists nearly every form attested as a Pilpel except from: Gen 21,16, where מְטַחֲוֵי is listed as a Pilel and רַעֲנָנָה in Jb 15,32 listed as a Palal.)
Polal—> Hollow LDp verbal stem
Pulal—> ?
Hitpolel—> Hollow LtD verbal stem
Pilpel—> R (Reduplicated verbal stem)
Polpal—> Rp
Hitpalpel—> RtD
Hpealal —> ? (Not entirely sure what to do with these.)
Nitpael—> ? (Not sure what to do with these. HALOT states that the forms corrupted, so do they even count?)
Nitpalpel—> N/A in BHS
Nitpoel—> N/A in BHS
Tifil —> ? (HALOT states that the form is not certain, seeing that it only occurs once in the entire BHS.)
*EDIT*
All in all, after trying to do this, I acknowledge Dr. Cook's point. It is very complicated to implement this system with the contested forms and it is perhaps not as versatile as the current system - although I guess that the current system isn't always that simple to work with either due to the fact that several of the forms are contested even as it is.
Edited by Pchris, 13 October 2014 - 05:40 PM.
Hardware: MacBook Pro 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7 (medio 2012)
Operating System: OSX 10.9.5 Mavericks.
#36
Posted 13 October 2014 - 06:03 PM
I know this is a wonderful place for us to talk about further elaborations of the Hebrew tagging system, but given the Groves database is our substrate, that’s not going to happen IMHO.
We could possibly see an alternative system for aspect in the first three options (as discussed above) and this thread really was meant to gauge interest in that particular change.
Thanks for all the other contributions, and it’s time to keep asking - who would like to see
qatal
yiqtol
wayyiqtol
as an alternative part of the system.
- Peter Brylov Christensen likes this
Ken
Lead Australian Accordance Demonstrator
Administrator, Accordance Exchange
Assistant Minister, Summer Hill Church
#37
Posted 13 October 2014 - 06:31 PM
Hi Ken,
I think Dr. Cook, Pchris, and I are in agreement with Dr. Holmstedt, and we are not "advocating a departure from the WLC tags, just a surface level name change."
If the discussion is about preferring neutral, scholarly terms for the ones in the drop down menu for Verb > Aspect, then I think it is an appropriate context to ask about the other terms on the menu, specifically the participle, which some believe is simply a conjugated adjective.
As Helen said, it would be programmed as an option. The underlying tags would remain the same.
Thanks for starting this thread.
Regards,
Michel
Edited by Michel Gilbert, 13 October 2014 - 06:34 PM.
#38
Posted 13 October 2014 - 06:51 PM
Hi Michel, my last post in no way was meant to be critical, just a refocus.
Ken
Lead Australian Accordance Demonstrator
Administrator, Accordance Exchange
Assistant Minister, Summer Hill Church
#39
Posted 13 October 2014 - 06:51 PM
+1 for the 'alternative' naming system. Thanks for raising this Ken.
#40
Posted 13 October 2014 - 06:52 PM
As my Semitics Sage said to me this morning, in his opinion:
"That would be a huge step forward!"
Edited by Ken Simpson, 13 October 2014 - 06:53 PM.
Ken
Lead Australian Accordance Demonstrator
Administrator, Accordance Exchange
Assistant Minister, Summer Hill Church
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users