From 9431a5cb8ec19f642c90be3e7bd7b1d75377e353 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Camil Staps
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 18:10:35 +0100
Subject: Handout Grüneberg

---
 gruneberg-handout.tex | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 gruneberg-handout.tex

(limited to 'gruneberg-handout.tex')

diff --git a/gruneberg-handout.tex b/gruneberg-handout.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbdd65d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gruneberg-handout.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+\documentclass[a4paper]{article}
+
+\usepackage[hidelinks]{hyperref}
+\usepackage[top=2cm]{geometry}
+\usepackage[font=small]{caption}
+\usepackage{handouts}
+
+\usepackage{polyglossia} 
+\setdefaultlanguage{british}
+\setotherlanguage{hebrew}
+\newfontfamily\dutchfont[Mapping=tex-text]{Latin Modern Roman}
+\newfontfamily\hebrewfont[Scale=MatchLowercase]{Ezra SIL}
+\DeclareTextFontCommand{\ez}{\hebrewfont}
+
+\usepackage{stfloats}
+\usepackage{subcaption}
+\usepackage{enumitem}
+
+\title{\Large Handout of ``The niphal in Hebrew''\footnote{In Keith N. Gr\"uneberg, \emph{Abraham, Blessing and the Nations} (2003).}}
+\author{Camil Staps}
+
+\begin{document}
+
+\maketitle
+
+%Under consideration is Gn.~12:3, \ez{הָאֲדָמָֽה מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת כֹּ֖ל בְךָ֔ \textcolor{red}{נִבְרְכ֣וּ}וְ אָאֹ֑ר וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ֖ מְבָ֣רְכֶ֔יךָ וַאֲבָֽרֲכָה֙}.
+%The niphal can be interpreted as passive (`be blessed'), middle (`find blessing') or reflexive (`bless themselves')%
+%	\pagenr{2a}.
+
+In the discussion about passive, middle and reflexive we distinguish
+	the \term{morphological} level,
+	the \term{semantic} level%
+		\note{reflexive in case of coreference of the semantic roles;
+			but for middles, a common property is yet to be found;
+			passives cannot be defined semantically as they correspond to an active sharing all semantic properties} and
+	the \term{relational} level%
+		\note{a use being relationally [reflexive] iff it expresses exactly the same action as the corresponding active ---
+			this is more restrictive than the semantic level}%
+		\pagenrs{3b--5a\footnote{Page numbers refer to the PDF, with `a' the left page and `b' the right page.}}.
+Uses that were originally relationally [reflexive] may cease to be so due to semantic shift\pagenr{5a}.
+
+The niphal expresses subject affectedness\pagenr{6b},
+	but may still have different nuances\pagenr{7a}.
+It may not be sharply distinguished from other stems,
+	and two stems may be complementary
+	(i.e., there may exist correlation between stem and tense)\pagenr{7b}.
+
+From particular instances we learn that the middle niphal may express
+	actions typically performed for \emph{one's own benefit}\pagenr{8a} and
+	typically \emph{reciprocal} actions\pagenr{8b}\note{though seemingly only for particular verbs}.
+It seems that \emph{grooming} actions are very rarely middle-marked\pagenr{9a}.
+Furthermore, many niphals are \emph{self-move} middles%
+	\footnote{This section seems to only reiterate parts of
+		S.W. Boyd, \emph{A synchronic analysis of the medio-passive-reflexive in Biblical Hebrew}, 1993.}%
+	\pagenr{9b};
+	related to this, verbs of \emph{separation}, \emph{hiding} and \emph{body posture} frequently occur in the niphal\pagenr{10a}.
+The niphal is used for verbs of \emph{gathering} ---
+	different from self-move middles in that they require two participants
+	and relate to Initiator--Addressee actives rather than Agent--Patient ones.
+However, they are middles in various languages and can be grouped as such\pagenr{10b}.
+A further use of the niphal is to denote spontaneous events\pagenr{11a}.
+Niphals of intransitive qals may be
+	inchoative from qal\note{`become holy'},
+	passive of piel\note{`be treated as holy'} or
+	reflexive of piel\note{`make oneself treated as holy'}\pagenr{11b}.
+Finally, the niphal is used for
+	verbs of appearing\pagenr{12a},
+	emotion and commitment\pagenr{12b}.
+
+The niphal probably wasn't passive originally%
+	\note{qal, piel and hiphil have internal passives and unlike those, the niphal has an imperative},
+	but still has passive force for all stages that we have evidence for\pagenr{13a}.
+It is marked by subject deletion or demotion\parnote{,
+	but differs from the self-move middle in that the Patient of the corresponding active remains a Patient (rather than becoming an Actor)}\pagenr{14a}.
+
+There are very few semantically direct reflexive niphals%
+	\note{many instances considered reflexive can be seen as middle or passive by the above categories}\pagenr{16a}.
+In those few cases, it would be directly clear to the reader that it is\pagenr{17b}.
+Hence\plainIdea{, but the author of the handout is generalising from the particular instance in Gn.~12:3 under consideration here},
+	instances that \emph{can} be read as middle or passive should not be read as reflexive.
+
+\end{document}
-- 
cgit v1.2.3

