No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Verb position in future clauses in Biblical Hebrew
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 November 2008
Abstract
In clauses with future meaning in Biblical Hebrew, a basically VSO language, there are consistent functional differences between clauses with verb-initial word order and clauses with non-verb-initial word order. Quantitative study shows that verb-initial clauses are associated with future events that come about through cooperation between (some combination of) the speaker, the listener, and God, whereas non-verb-initial clauses are associated with future events that are the result of unilateral action. This is related to the finding of Givón (1977) that, in clauses with past time reference in Biblical Hebrew, verb-initial order is associated with the unmarked function of temporal sequencing and continuity of the narrative, whereas non-verb-initial order is associated with a break in sequencing and discontinuity. If we take verb-initial order as generally associated with unmarked discourse functions, these data suggest that cooperation represents the unmarked expectation in dialogues about the future in the same way that sequencing represents the unmarked expectation in narratives about the past.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992
References
Boucher, Jerry, & Osgood, Charles E. (1969). The Pollyanna hypothesis. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Li, Charles N. (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic. 25–56.Google Scholar
Fox, Andrew. (1983). Topic continuity in early Biblical Hebrew. In Givón, (1983). 215–254.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. (1977). The drift from VSO to SVO in Biblical Hebrew: The pragmatics of tense-aspect. In Li, Charles N. (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change. Austin: University of Texas Press. 181–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. (1982). Tense-aspect-modality: The creole prototype and beyond. In Hopper, P. J. (ed.), Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 115–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. (ed.). (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: Quantitative cross-language studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, Susan. (1990). Topic and focus positions as a consequence of word order type: What is universal? Paper presented at the International Pragmatics Conference.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. (1979). Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In Givón, Talmy (ed.), On understanding grammar. New York: Academic. 213–241.Google Scholar
Jeffers, Robert J. (1976). Typological shift and change in complex sentence structure. In Papers from the parasession on diachronic syntax. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 136–149.Google Scholar
Labov, William. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In Labov, William, Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 354–396.Google Scholar
Lambdin, Thomas O. (1971). Introduction to Biblical Hebrew. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Myhill, John. (1992). Word order and temporal sequencing. In Payne, Doris (ed.), The pragmatics of word order flexibility. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myhill, John. (1993). Why does a language change its word order? Evidence from the decline of the jussive in Biblical Hebrew. Ms., University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Myhill, John, & Xing, Zhiqun. (1992). Towards an objective definition of contrast. Ms., University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Myhill, John, & Xing, Zhiqun. (1993). The discourse functions of patient fronting: A comparative study of Biblical Hebrew and Chinese. Linguistics 33(1):25–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar