Jump to content


Photo

Syntax of Ge. 1:1-3 appears to be broken


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 miketisdell

miketisdell

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 440 posts
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows, Android

Posted 11 September 2019 - 08:38 AM

In Ge. 1:3, ויאמר אלהים should be a simple V/S pair but this seems to have gotten confused because the way that predicate has been connected. 

 

 

 

Attached File  syntax1.jpg   122.03KB   0 downloads

 

 



#2 Robert Holmstedt

Robert Holmstedt

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 854 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 11 September 2019 - 09:08 AM

I don't see a problem in the diagram -- the ב PP that begins in v. 1 is a large fronted adjunct to the wayyiqtol verb in v. 3. That wayyiqtol must continue after the subject because its complement is the direct speech.

 

In case anyone is interested in trudging the many issues concerning the syntactic options for Gen 1:1-3, I've attached a forthcoming article (it should be out late this Fall or early Winter 2020).

 

Attached File  2020 Eskhult FS Genesis 1.pdf   190.82KB   5 downloads


Edited by Robert Holmstedt, 11 September 2019 - 11:01 AM.

  • MattChristian likes this
Professor, Hebrew and Northwest Semitic Languages
Dept. of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations
The University of Toronto
blog: ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com
https://utoronto.aca...RobertHolmstedt

#3 miketisdell

miketisdell

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 440 posts
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows, Android

Posted 11 September 2019 - 12:16 PM

I don't see a problem in the diagram -- the ב PP that begins in v. 1 is a large fronted adjunct to the wayyiqtol verb in v. 3. That wayyiqtol must continue after the subject because its complement is the direct speech.

 

In case anyone is interested in trudging the many issues concerning the syntactic options for Gen 1:1-3, I've attached a forthcoming article (it should be out late this Fall or early Winter 2020).

 

attachicon.gif2020 Eskhult FS Genesis 1.pdf

 

 

In the original picture, can you see the highlighted text when the cursor is placed over the top level Predicate in vs. 3?

 

I did notice that a construct search appear to work correct i.e. the following search does return vs. 1:3:

 

Attached File  construct1.jpg   98.44KB   0 downloads

 

And if I include the ESV English text, the associated highlights appear to be reasonably accurate for the English text, but not for the Hebrew. When only the search results are displayed, the Hebrew text is not highlighted. 

 

Attached File  syntax2.jpg   102.68KB   0 downloads



#4 miketisdell

miketisdell

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 440 posts
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows, Android

Posted 11 September 2019 - 12:19 PM

In the original picture, can you see the highlighted text when the cursor is placed over the top level Predicate in vs. 3?

 

I did notice that a construct search appear to work correct i.e. the following search does return vs. 1:3:

 

attachicon.gifconstruct1.jpg

 

And if I include the ESV English text, the associated highlights appear to be reasonably accurate for the English text, but not for the Hebrew. When only the search results are displayed, the Hebrew text is not highlighted. 

 

attachicon.gifsyntax2.jpg


I am also curious about why the first clause is associated with vs. 1:1-2, but the last cause is independent? (Similar in vs. 1:6)



#5 Robert Holmstedt

Robert Holmstedt

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 854 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 11 September 2019 - 01:47 PM

Aha. Well, highlighting is not my area. It's fairly complex with the syntax because I think they programmed it to follow the syntactic trees/nodes, not just the words. But, again, I can't give any authoritative answer.

 

V. 3 is an "independent" cause because it's a main clause. It is not subordinate/dependent on another clause. In contrast, v. 1 is a dependent phrase that has within it an unmarked relative clause. And v. 2 is a parenthesis, which almost always have a pragmatic-syntactic anchor in a preceding clause. Parentheses are thus kind of independent and kind of dependent. Odd critters. 


Professor, Hebrew and Northwest Semitic Languages
Dept. of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations
The University of Toronto
blog: ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com
https://utoronto.aca...RobertHolmstedt




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users