[b-hebrew] QATAl vs. VAYYIQTOL: Can we make sense of this construction?

Herman Meester crazymulgogi at gmail.com
Fri Mar 31 12:33:26 EST 2006


안녕하세요?

Rolf Furuli may well be right:
For some reason (which, remains to be clarified), the author of Ezra
wanted 1,7 to begin with the words "we-hammelekh Koresh...". He then
could not proceed with a wayyiqtol-form, because as a wayyiqtol begins
with, what looks like, the word "and...", the sentence would be broken
up.

Therefore, considerations of sentence order variation had the author
do what he did.
I agree there is no better instant explanation for this passage, but
as we have discussed before on this forum, I do not agree with mr.
Furuli's basic assumptions regarding the verbal system, which involve
activities on the part of the masoretes that I think have never taken
place.
Cf. for an alternative vision, Galia Hatav, "Anchoring world and time
in biblical Hebrew",
Journal of Linguistics 40, 2004, 491-526.

As Ezra is a rather late text, we may not simply be able to compare
the syntax of, say, Deuteronomy ~ 2Kings with Ezra/Nehemia. The very
first sentence of Ezra is different too: it doesn't begin "wayhi
bi-shnat...", but u-vi-shnat... This may mean that the syntax of Ezra
would need its own, separate, description. If it's worth the trouble
;)

For the same reason, for example, BH poetry needs its own independent syntax.

best regards,
Herman


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list