52
3.4.14 Rocine, Learning Biblical Hebrew: A New Approach Using
Discourse Analysis , 2000
Rocine’s Learning Biblical Hebrew: A New Approach Using Discourse Analysis is “written to teach the exegetical power of discourse analysis right from the start”
Rocine 2000, 51. Rocine acknowledges the work of Niccacci and Longacre as being fundamental to his project. The influence of Longacre is especially clear in Rocine’s use
of discourse profiles and verb rankings. To Niccacci, Rocine owes his distinction between the Historical Narrative genre and Direct Speech, which he calls “the ‘other half’
of biblical prose” Rocine 2000, 62. Rocine calls
the “Historical Narrative transition marker” Rocine 2000, 51, stating that
[t]he wayyiqtol form of is simultaneously a divider and joiner of text.
It is a divider in the sense that it marks the onset of a new scene or a new episode or the entrance of a new participant in the story. At the same time
it does indeed join the scene or episode it marks to a larger discourse. Rocine 2000, 51
How exactly “joins” the scene or episode to a larger discourse is unclear, but
for Rocine the primary function of is that of indicating a transition within a
discourse. For example, in one of the readings in his book, Rocine discusses Gen 17:1:
Abram was ninety-nine years old, Pc-vqw3msXa np ncmsc-amp ncfs Pc-afs
ncfp
5
Gen 17:1
stating that this verse is an example of a discourse “bounded by plus a specification
of time” Rocine 2000, 299. In this case, Rocine goes on to explain that the “specification of time is the verbless clause which follows”
2000, 299. This
53 comment reflects an analysis that sees
as essentially detached from the temporal expression. This raises questions about the syntactic connection of
to the clause which follows it, which is one of the main issues discussed throughout Chapter 9, The
Temporal Uses of .
3.4.15 Analytical Summary of the Textlinguistic Approach
The publications reviewed in this section are representative of a shift in perspective within Linguistics that has influenced the study of biblical Hebrew. One of
the main common denominators is an awareness of the need to analyze not only the syntactic components with which an element like
occurs, but also to consider the possible functions of
in the textual environments in which it occurs. The taxonomic nature of linguistic descriptions is seen in both the traditional and
descriptive approaches discussed here and the need to consider all the data continues into the textlinguistic approach. The goal of all three approaches is description, but the
descriptive approach, in contrast to the traditional approach, has less of a prescriptive
tone. In other words, in a descriptive grammar, grammatical components are described as they are in one language without comparison with some idealized linguistic structure.
Description is still a fundamental element of a textlinguistic approach, but the goal is to accomplish more than merely describing the linguistic objects at hand. The goal
is to go beyond mere description and move toward prediction. In other words, a textlinguistic approach should produce an analysis which is descriptive, without being
prescriptive and not merely descriptive, but also predictive. To be predictive means that the description of grammar, syntax, and textual organization goes beyond merely
54 observing what something like
does; rather, the description is the foundation for being able to anticipate or predict why or under what circumstances a certain element is
used. As Dik comments: …a theory of grammar should not be content to display the rules of
language for their own sake, but should try, wherever possible, to explain these rules in terms of their functionality with respect to the ways they are
used and to the ultimate purposes of these uses. Dik 1978, 2
From this perspective, there are certain ways in which statements about linguistic patterns or occurrences should be made. Statements that element
X
often occurs or that element
Y
can occur in a particular environment may describe representative cases of those linguistic elements, but more precise parameters are needed. This is not meant to
imply that every problematic case disappears and that all exceptions magically vanish, but by broadening the contexts which textlinguistic approaches consider, a much greater
degree of predictability is made possible. These statements may be hypotheses, but the objective is to clearly state the hypothesis so that it can be verified or refuted. As van der
Merwe insightfully comments, “even if some hypotheses are refuted, our knowledge is furthered by knowing what a construction does not mean” van der Merwe 1994, 39. The
problem with statements like “often occurs” and “can occur” is that they are not easily verified or refuted.
Another facet of a predictive analysis is the necessary consideration of non- occurrences. For example, an analysis may state that
occurs with temporal clauses that signal a new episode in the text. In order to account for all the dimensions of this use
of , however, the following questions must also be asked:
55 1 Are all new episodes initiated by
+ temporal clause? If not, then the function of
+ temporal clause is not fully known until new episodes without
+ temporal clause are brought into the analysis. 2 Is the only function of
+ temporal clause the introduction of new episodes? If not, then the other uses of
+ temporal clause must be considered to more fully discern under what conditions
does in fact occur with a temporal clause to initiate a new episode.
In Narrative Syntax, van Wolde comments that …most linguistic studies of Biblical Hebrew mainly focus on the analysis
of how the forms are organized. Only a few deal with the question of motivation and ask why a specific form is used in a certain text. van
Wolde 1997, 21
The goal of textlinguistic studies, then, should be to move beyond how to why. The goal of the present study is to contribute to this process.
56
CHAPTER 4
THE NEED FOR FURTHER STUDY OF
It might seem from the preceding review of studies which deal with that there
is little more that could be said about this enigmatic little word. One of the goals here, however, is to deal exhaustively with
and in the process, further refine current understanding of its uses and functions as well as extend the analysis into areas not yet
adequately explored. There are many aspects of where and when
is used that are not well-defined. Part of the problem with previous studies is the untestability of what they claim
concerning ’s functions. To merely label it a macro-syntactic marker or “Text-
deiktikon” does not answer many of the questions that come from seeing the diverse ways in which
is used. If the function of is “Tempusmarker,” another set of
questions arises. There are many past tense narratives that don’t have any occurrences of and certain texts seem to have many more than would be needed to simply mark past
tense. Questions like these and those discussed in the next three sections indicate that there is much more to be understood about the uses and functions of
. These sections are followed by a detailed discussion of van der Merwe’s analysis of
in 1 Samuel.
57
4.1 Questions Raised by
Kategori