erratio | Oh botheration

You're viewing

erratio's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

Inspired by a thread on a mailing list about learning how to downgrade one's swearing practices, feeling as though I can't swear while at work because there are customers around who might hear me, and by the usual early morning meandering thoughts that being at work provides me with, I have decided to outsource my swearing needs to the Hebrew language.

Reasons for swearing in Hebrew:

1. The fricative /x/* sounds pleasingly violent for the purpose of using swearing to vent my rage
2. Almost no one I know understands Hebrew
3. For bonus points, the only people who are likely to both understand and take offense at my misuse of the Holy Language are ultra-orthodox Jews, and since their narrow-minded and patriarchal take on Judaism pisses me off this can only be a Good Thing.

* It's similar to a throat clearing sound

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From: (Anonymous)

(From Simon)

This usage of the imperfective (aka "Future Tense") in order to express a command is actually not considered to be an imperative at all: it's a jussive. In Biblical Hebrew, jussives are overwhelmingly more common in the third person but they do exist in the second person as well and are indentical in appearance (unless they are III-hehs) to a regular imperfective.

Also, the negative form of a jussive is formed by either adding לא or אל as a prefix; there is no negative imperative in Hebrew - but that's a side point. When you say that the "more punchy" form (ie: the imperative form) only works some of the time, I imagine that that's just because Israeli Hebrew has largely lost the imperative in favour of the jussive. It works all the time in Biblical Hebrew.

From: (Anonymous)

(from Daniel)

Okay.

So what I call second person future moonlights as a jussive (in English, "May you [x]"). And the imperative form (in English, "[x]!") is formed by dropping the prefix from the jussive.

What I meant about it not always working in Modern Hebrew is that, for instance, I don't think "hitpael"s can be imperative, only jussive (to take a famous line from the formerly popular comedy show "Eretz Nehederet" - "Al titnatzel, techatzel!" = "Don't apologise, add eggplant [to my sabich]!" could be said "Al titnatzel, chatzel!" (with loss of comedic, but not linguistic, effect) but I know of no imperative form of "titnatzel").

Are you saying that in Hebrew there is an imperative form of "hitpael"s and all other forms, which is separate to the jussive? How does it work?

From: (Anonymous)

(from Simon)

Hithpael imperatives are identical to the hithpael infinitives - for the word that you utilised it would be התנצל ('hitnatzel'), with the inclusion of the ה (as mentioned before in relation to השתגל). Hithpaels, hiphils and niphals are the only stems to see this inclusion of a ה although it should also be noted that hophals never appear in the imperative in the Bible but that if they did they would have most probably been formed on analogy with the hiphil.

Jussives are often shortened forms, but this is most often evident if the word is a III-heh, in which case the ה disappears. So for √bnh, for example, the imperative is בנה ('bneh') but the third-person jussive is יבן ('yiben'). You can thus generally tell the difference between jussives and imperfectives but not always. You could probably argue, I suppose, that they are the same thing: conceptually the jussive is a function of the imperfective anyway, right?

Without wanting to suddenly make this thread overly complicated, I would imagine that we are dealing with two broad classes: Imperatives (with a capital I) and Volitives. The imperatives (that is, with a lower-case i) belong in the class of Imperatives, while jussives (depending on their function) can either belong in Imperatives or in Volitives. The Volitives themselves (which also, I guess include the prohibitives which are simply jussives plus a negative adverb) are also within the even broader category of Imperfectives, along with all of the regular imperfective verbs.

Does that make sense?

From: (Anonymous)

(from Daniel)

I think I follow. It's just very strange as I am not familiar with many of the constructions you mention in Modern Hebrew - meaning either that they have dropped out of the language, or that I am just not familiar with them.

In particular, you mentioned that you form the negative of a jussive by adding אל or לא before it. As far as I know in Modern Hebrew, the negative can be expressed only by אל + jussive ("Al titnatzel") or by לא + infinitive ("Lo lehitnatzel").

Jen: Sorry for hijacking your blog for this pedantic enterprise. I don't think you deserved it.

From: (Anonymous)

(from Simon)

Oy, this is getting complicated, isn't it?
In Biblical Hebrew, the infinitive can also serve as a volitive (ie: "[Please] do x") or a prohibitive ("[Do not] do x"). The regular prohibitives, however, are formed off the jussive and they have a negative adverb inserted before them. By the time we get to the Rabbinic writings, this negative adverb is always אל, without exception (unless quoting the Bible), but in the Bible itself it can also be לא.

Case in point: read the 10 commandments (either in Exodus 20 or Deuteronomy 5) - they all have לא. Also, if you read the story of Solomon's trying the two women (found in 1 Kings 3:16-28, esp. 26-27), you'll see that the author alternates between the two. They seem to possess the same meaning.

Anyway, it's quite possible that this terminology is not even employed at all by Israelis discussing Israeli Hebrew. To the best of my knowledge, you don't speak of perfectives, imperfectives and participles, right? Just pasts, futures and presents?

And, yes, very sorry for having hijacked your post, Jen. But I think you secretly love it. You're just too scared to admit it and look like a nerd (*grins*)

Have a good Yom Kippur!

From: (Anonymous)

(from Daniel)

I'm with you. The "infinitive serving as a volitive" trick also works in Modern Hebrew. My mum had funny stories about when she and my dad lived in Israel, and she tried (unsuccessfully) to teach at a primary school (she had studied teaching in Sydney before they came to Israel).

At the Ulpan, though, they were not taught the regular imperative form - perhaps because it was considered impolite, or less elegant Hebrew? - instead, she only knew the infinitive form - "na lashevet" or "b'vakasha lashevet" (and not, "shev!"). Needless to say, the kids ate her alive.

Now that I think about it, it is doubtful whether this linguistic barrier alone was the reason for her being completely disobeyed. Kids are quick to latch on to any chink in the armour of their teachers, and I guess this was just an available chink.

In terms of the terminology used in Modern Hebrew, I can't really help - I never went to Ulpan or otherwise formally learnt the grammar in any depth. There's a book I'd like to get out of the library on Modern Hebrew grammar, though - I'll let you know when I've read more.

Had a good Yom Kippur! Hope you did too (that's Simon & Jen & anyone else who may be reading ...)