Shmuel Bolozky

As a graduate student in Hebrew Bible, I find this book to be entirely unhelpful. It is difficult to use, confusing, and misrepresents the Hebrew language. Four specific flaws are discussed here. (1) Hebrew does not have tenses, so it is incorrect for this book to list forms under "past," "present" and "future" when conjugations should be listed under their aspect: perfect, imperfect, participle, infinitive, imperative, etc. This is especially true because the lack of tenses is one point on which beginning Hebrew students are already confused; reference works should not contradict facts and further confuse learners. Students who list tenses where aspects belong on a parsing assignment will loose points and demonstrate that they do not understand the Hebrew language. For example, while it is true that the perfect is often used for past action, it more properly means "completed action." As such, it is also used for commands about future actions given by God, because the Hebrew bible considers these commands to be so certain to come to pass that they are in some sense completed. Thus, "past" misrepresents the perfect aspect. (2) The typical order for conjugating Semitic verbs is 3ms, 3fs, 2ms, 2fs, 1cs... but this book scrambles the list (which will confuse students who consult it as a reference work). (3) In addition, many of the paradigms listed do not match the actual form of the paradigms which occur in Biblical Hebrew, so students will not be able to complete their translations using this reference work. (4) Finally, and most upsetting, Hebrew verbs conjugate in a variety of verbal stems, named Qal, Piel, Hiphil, etc. (also sometimes named by letter: G-stem, D-stem, C-stem, etc.). This can be one of the most confusing parts of learning Hebrew, as the same verb conjugates differently in the different stems; but no information on the stems is provided in this work. Students must instead decipher which stem is meant by the definitions provided in the book; in contrast, a useful reference work should explicitly indicate which stem is meant. For example, "to come" represents the simple active meaning of the word, thus the conjugations listed under this meaning can be presumed to be Qal of G-Stem; "to bring" [i.e. "to cause to come"] is causative, thus these conjugations represent the Hiphil or C-stem; "to be brought" is clearly one of the passive stems, but students may not be able to determine which passive (Niphal, Poal, Hophal) is indicated by this paradigm. Overall, this work is too confusing and inaccurate to be useful as a reference work. Beginning Hebrew students will be confused and misled by using this work. Advanced students and professionals, although less likely to be confused, require additional information which is not provided in this text. Thus, the work is not useful for beginners or for professionals.… (más)