Robert Holmstedt Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 (edited) In the syntax database, participles are treated as the complements of a (mostly null, rarely היה) copula. This occurs in two different syntactic environments: 1) when the null copula is the main/matrix predicate, e.g., "the man [is] running"; and 2) when the null copula is within a relative clause (marked or unmarked by ה), e.g., "the man (who) [is] running". In the case of #2, an additional complication is that sometimes the head of the relative is also null (aka "a headless" or "independent" relative), e.g., "Ø[the one] (who) [is] running ... is a friend". Searching for cases like this can be found with the searches attached below (one search without the ה relative marker and one search with the ה relative marker). Note that in the absence of the relative ה, there are 3 nulls in a row: "[he] [who] [he] is running". Therefore, it is necessary to click the Null item and chose "3 consecutive" nulls to get the correct hits. Finally, one further complication is the use of the "participle" form (Qal=qotel; Hiphil=maqtel) as an agentive noun. These cases of "substantival participles" are not actually participles; they should be understood as agentive nouns that simply share the same form as the participle (i.e., homophony). But the homophony creates obvious confusion—is רֹעֶה simply "shepherd" or is it truly participial, "[one] (who) [is] shepherding"? We have taken a narrow approach to identifying this category the question and follow the criteria below for analyzing a given QOTEL/MAQTEL form as a substantive: Participles are tagged as simple nominal items WHEN: i. The Participle is one of the few recognized (mostly) agentive forms (e.g.,Qal שׁוֹפֵט, בּוֹנֶה, יוֹצֵר, עֹשֶׂה, רוֹפֵא, and רוֹעֶה, and less commonly from derived בנינים such as מַצִּיל), and ii. does NOT modify an overt NP head (relatively), and does NOT have any complements or non-possessive adjuncts, e.g., אֶבֶן מָאֲסוּ הַבּוֹנִים ‘the stone (that) the builders rejected’. and iii. is NOT bound to a following pronoun or noun, e.g., בְּמוֹת הַשּׁוֹפֵט ‘in the dying of the judge’. * If the pronoun or noun to which the participle is bound does NOT make sense as a complement of the participle (e.g., רֹעֵי גְרָר ‘shepherds of Gerar, in which Gerar makes no sense as the complement of shepherding; contrast with יושׁבי העיר in which the NP is an appropriate locative complement and so the participle must be tagged as a relative), but does make sense as a possessor, then the participle may also be tagged simply as a noun, e.g., שׁוֹלְמִי ‘my friend’. Note that such cases of a substantive participle bound to a possessor (and not a complement) are very rare. Searching for substantive uses of these morphological forms (QOTEL/MAQTEL) is a simple as searching for SUBJECT=VERB(Participle), COMPLEMENT=VERB(Participle), etc. NullHeadParticipleRelatives.zip Edited November 22, 2017 by Robert Holmstedt 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now