Determination of the noun in Biblical Hebrew

The two comprehensive reference grammars for Biblical Hebrew, Gesenius/Kautzsch and Joüon/Muraoka, in addition to the more or less generally accepted categories of use of the definite article, make use of a category which they describe as not having to do with definiteness in the sense that we know it. In this category they group the instances of use of the article that do not seem to fit into the generally accepted categories, instances where the Hebrew definite article, in German and English respectively, is said to be expressed by an indefinite article. In the present article, I analyse the 67 examples given to substantiate the existence of the proposed category. I argue that this category probably does not exist and I contend that most of the examples, when carefully analysed, are examples of regular article usage. When the nouns in question are perceived as nondetermined and translated as such, it is because we are not sufficiently familiar with ancient Hebrew language and culture and hence do not possess the contextual information the articles refer to.     

Die bewertung des ungeborenen lebens im alten israel und im alten orient

Abstract

First, how does Haggai “construct” the temple, i.e. what view does he hold of it, its function and its significance? The answer here is that, whatever the Second Temple actually was, Haggai does not construct it as a place of sacrifice, a house of prayer, a location of the presence of God, a pivot of the economic system of Judah, a focus of ethnic identity, etc., but as a treasury. It must be rebuilt because it is a shame (not “glory") for Yahweh not to have a “house” in which treasures of silver and gold belonging to him can be stored and exhibited (2,7–9). And this temple must be rebuilt quickly because of the imminent political‐military upheaval ("shaking") of the earth that will result in booty in large quantities arriving in Jerusalem.

Second, is there anything in the text of the book that undermines this “construction” of the temple? Yes, there is an underlying conflict in the text (amounting to a deconstruction) over the issue of honour Yahweh is dishonoured by the ruined state of the temple, but it is not the rebuilding of the temple that will bring him honour. Further, the designation of the Judaeans and the “work of their hands” as “unclean” (2,14) deconstructs the text's placing responsibility for the rebuilding in their hands. Further still, the sudden narrowing of focus to Zerubbabel in the closing verses of the book (2,20–23), and the unprepared designation of him as an eschatological king, deconstructs the prophecy's professed concern with the temple.

Third, can these deconstructionists be deployed in the service of a reconstruction? Here I use the axiom that texts exist in order to repress social conflicts. Yes, we can first reconstitute the social reality implied by the text: from the deconstruction over the issue of honour we can reconstruct the conflict between enthusiasts for temple rebuilding and resisters. From the deconstruction over cleanness and uncleanness we can reconstruct the conflict between the leadership and the proletariat. From the deconstruction regarding Zerubbabel we can reconstruct the political conflict over the governorship.

And yes, we can secondly “construct” the social reality created by the reading of the text today. Here we can see how the reading of the text by biblical scholars functions as a repression of conflicts of interest and ideology among different groups of readers, and how the deconstructability of the text can serve to bring such conflict to consciousness.     

Political economy and social legislation in Germany,ca 1870–1890

Summary

This article examines the nature of academic political theory in Britain in the post-war period, examining in particular the degree to which theorists were able to mount normative theoretical arguments. Traditionally, commentators such as Brian Barry and Perry Anderson have argued that political theory in this period was largely dead between 1945 and 1970 due to the impact of positivism, but I argue this is mistaken for two main reasons. First, it fails to distinguish between the different forms that positivism took in the post-war era. Thus although it is true many theorists tended to claim that moral and political values could (or should) not be discussed rationally, their reasons for doing so varied considerably. For while theorists such as A. J. Ayer and T. D. Weldon justified their positions theoretically, with arguments drawn from behaviourist social science or innovations made in linguistic philosophy, others, such as Ralf Dahrendorf and Anthony Crosland, argued that it was the perceived success of post-war welfare states or the alleged failure of political ideologies that made traditional political theory irrelevant. Second, following on from this, I argue that delineating more accurately how positivism actually operated helps to explain how political theorists were able to pursue their discipline normatively—albeit that few reacted to all aspects of positivism. Thus if some (such as Karl Popper) were more concerned to insist that political philosophy had something to say in practice, others (such as Michael Oakeshott), reacted more strongly against the proposition that human behaviour can be understood purely causally. Finally, I examine the impact of ordinary language philosophy on post-war political theory, and argue that rather than simply damaging the cause of normative political theory by encouraging a myopic concentration on the linguistic analysis of particular moral and political concepts, over the longer term its effects were much more positive, since it helped to focus attention on the irreducibly normative dimension of political concepts.     

War museums as agonistic spaces: possibilities,opportunities and constraints

ABSTRACT

Following the theorisation of museums as agonistic spaces and drawing on a comparative analysis of war museums located in various European countries, this paper argues that these institutions play complex and multi-layered roles beyond their obvious educational function. These not easily reconcilable roles act as major constraints upon the form and content of exhibitions and work against the adoption of an agonistic approach. However, the paper also argues that war museums are especially apt to become sites of political contestation able to engage with agonistic memory and unsettling counter-narratives. This is due in large part to the nature of the subject matter they deal with, as war and conflict lend themselves to being represented in ways that emphasise patriotic consensus but can also highlight dissent, contestation, multiple perspectives and alternative visions of society. Agonistic practices emerge when windows of opportunity open through a combination of top-down and bottom-up agency able to take advantage of particular socio-political circumstances or cultural developments. The paper also discusses a new exhibition on war memory planned for late 2018 in Essen, Germany and conceived as a strategic political intervention, which aims to communicate in an agonistic fashion with its audiences.