Ivrit

[cellio]

My printer is currently holding hostage half a sheet of mangled paper, and the manual's instructions for clearing jams presume that (1) the "release the grip, darnit" button works and (2) you have access to enough paper to grab hold. I hope this doesn't involve a screwdriver...

But hey, at least one of my appliances is working, so here's another attempt to communicate little nothings in a foreign language.



(That's a thumbnail; click for a larger copy that more closely resembles the size at which I wrote it...)

Comments

[cellio]

Todah rabbah.

I'm a little fuzzy on when you have to be explicit about subjects. If the verb technically gives you enough information (there's only one "he" in this discussion, so a third-person singular verb without a subject would default, right?) it seems to be sometimes included and sometimes not. Any guidelines? Or is it that biblical Hebrew is the outlier in often leaving it out and actual speakers today usually include it? Is there a difference between speaking and writing?

[(Anonymous)]

AFAIK, subjects are usually included in modern Hewbrew and not always included in biblical Hebrew. The thing here is that the verb itself doesn't give you all the information; it only gives you singular/plural or masculine/feminine. So if no subject is present, the actual identity of the subject (1st, 2nd or 3rd person) has to be inferred from context. Biblical Hebrew relies more heavily on context (and leaves room for different meforshim to step in), so you don't always see an explicit subject. Modern Hebrew is a (re)constructed language, and that makes a difference. I get the impression that Ben-Yehuda was a) influenced by his greater familiarity with European languages, which often require explicit use of a subject, and b) intent on ensuring consistency.

[ichur72.livejournal.com]

Sorry, that was me!

[ichur72.livejournal.com]

Thought of something else that I meant to write but ditzed out on. (Hard to think about grammar and hold a squirmy toddler at the same time.)

I think you can get by without a subject more easily in past* and future tenses because in those tenses, the conjugation actually makes it clear what the subject is, rather than just stating number and gender.

* This is more true of three-letter roots than two-letter roots because the masculine singular conjugation for present tense (e.g., hu shar, "he sings") is the same as the third-person masculine singular conjugation (e.g., hu shar, "he sang").

[cellio]

Thanks for the feedback. I had been thinking that "shar" was unambiguous for number/gender, and it is in the past tense (what I meant) -- what I failed to notice is that it takes exactly the same form in past and present, so the tense itself is ambiguous!