search

openscriptures / morphhb

Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible
https://hb.openscriptures.org
Other
178 stars 64 forks source link

Is a modal imperfect with nunation a jussive? #16

Closed peterdanielmyers closed 10 years ago

peterdanielmyers commented 10 years ago

Traditionally the jussive is identified by the apocopated form of the imperfect, which only exists in some binyan with certain roots. Sometimes nunation appears to occur with the jussive. It also occurs with the imperfect.

Should an imperfect form where apocopation is impossible, which is jussive in meaning, be considered morphologically jussive if there is nunation?

There are other views on the function of nunation: a recent theory by Robar is that it performs thematic marking, for example.

But I just wanted to flag up that this is something we need to make a decision about. Should we only tag apocopated forms as morphologically jussive, or might nunation also be considered an occasional morphological indicator of the jussive form?

yaaqov commented 10 years ago

Can you cite an passage or two to explain the dilemma?

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:22 PM, peterdanielmyers <notifications@github.com

wrote:

Traditionally the jussive is identified by the apocopated form of the imperfect, which only exists in some binyan with certain roots. Sometimes nunation appears to occur with the jussive. It also occurs with the imperfect.

Should an imperfect form where apocopation is impossible, which is jussive in meaning, be considered morphologically jussive if there is nunation?

There are other views on the function of nunation: a recent theory by Robar is that it performs thematic marking, for example.

But I just wanted to flag up that this is something we need to make a decision about. Should we only tag apocopated forms as morphologically jussive, or might nunation also be considered an occasional morphological indicator of the jussive form?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openscriptures/morphhb/issues/16 .

peterdanielmyers commented 10 years ago

See JM 44e and 46.

The observation arose when I was parsing something In Gen 2/3.

After some discussions with the OSHB team, I'm now not directly contributing to the OSHB project. Instead, I'm working directly on my own project that makes use of the OSHB lemma tagging and will make that available to the OSHB team for backporting into it if they want. That's the working relationship another project (STEP Bible) has also developed with the OSHB.

yaaqov commented 10 years ago

Thank you for the update, and I look forward to seeing how your project goes! Who are the active members of the OSHB team now? On Apr 24, 2014 6:22 AM, "peterdanielmyers" notifications@github.com wrote:

See JM 44e and 46.

The observation arose when I was parsing something In Gen 2/3.

After some discussions with the OSHB team, I'm now not directly contributing to the OSHB project. Instead, I'm working directly on my own project that makes use of the OSHB lemma tagging and will make that available to the OSHB team for backporting into it if they want. That's the working relationship another project (STEP Bible) has also developed with the OSHB.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openscriptures/morphhb/issues/16#issuecomment-41264621 .

dowens76 commented 10 years ago

Those who are active in the project discuss issues at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openscriptures-hb. You can see the members there, though I know of at least one active contributor who is not subscribed to the list.