Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] The perspective of this native speaker of Modern Hebrew of Biblical Hebrew tenses

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] The perspective of this native speaker of Modern Hebrew of Biblical Hebrew tenses
  • Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:14:52 +0000

On 28/11/2004 20:41, Peter Kirk wrote:

On 27/11/2004 22:29, Rolf Furuli wrote:

...

The data above includes only WAYYIQTOLs. The table which the comments above relates to, refers to 715 WAYYIQTOLs of 1st person singular/plural. Of these, 101 have a paragogic he ("cohortative"), 51 are apocopated; 103 could have been apocopated but are not; and 460 could not be apocopated. This shows clearly that non-apocopation was the trend for 1st person-forms; the opposite of what we would expect if a short form was sought whenever possible because the antecedent was a short YAQTUL.

...

So I started a further search and found 143 words starting with vav-qamats-alef and ending with he. These will include most but not all of the non-apocopated 1st person singular WAYYIQTOLs, as well as cases of. These also include a large number of cases of paragogic he, i.e. he added on after the end of the normal verb root, the opposite of apocopation (and common practice with the cohortative). I don't have time to look at all of these, but it is interesting that the huge majority of both non-apocopated forms and paragogic hes are in the books from Ezra onwards, in the English Bible order, in other words generally either late or poetic books. There are only two of them in the Pentateuch: DEU 1:16,18. This suggests that there is a late tendency to add paragogic he to first person WAYYIQTOLs by analogy with cohortatives.

I found a way of refining my search based on the Westminster morphology. I get the following results, which basically agree with yours:

1st person WAYYIQTOL total: 708

1st person WAYYIQTOL apocopated: 51 (GEN 24:46; 31:10; 41:22; EXO 6:3; 9:15; NUM 13:33; 23:4; 31:50; DEU 2:1,8,33,34; 3:1,1,6,18; 9:15,16; 10:3,5; 29:4; JDG 18:4; NEH 1:4; 2:11,13,15,15; 4:8; JOB 30:9; PSA 18:24; 38:15; 69:12; 73:14; PRO 7:7; ISA 64:5; EZK 1:4,15,27; 11:16; 23:13; 43:8; 44:4; DAN 10:5; HOS 13:7; ZEC 2:1,5; 4:4,11,12; 5:9; 6:4)

1st person WAYYIQTOL with paragogic he: 101, of which the great majority are in later books (GEN 32:6; 41:11; 43:21; NUM 8:19; JOS 24:8; JDG 6:9,10; 10:12; 12:3,3; 1SA 2:28; 28:15; 2SA 4:10; 7:9; 12:8,8; 22:24; EZR 7:28; 8:15,16,17,17,23,23,24,25,25,26,28,31; 9:3,3,5,5,6; NEH 1:4; 2:1,6,9,13; 5:7,7,8,13; 6:3,8,11,12; 7:5; 12:31; 13:7,8,9,9,10,11,11,13,17,17,19,19,21,21,22,30; JOB 1:15,16,17,19; 19:20; 29:17; PSA 3:6; 7:5; 69:12,21; 73:16; 90:10; 119:55,59,106,131,147,158; ECC 1:17; JER 11:18; 32:9; EZK 3:3; 9:8; 16:11; DAN 8:13,15,17; 9:3,4,4; 10:16,16,19; 12:8; ZEC 11:13)

I couldn't find a way to check how many of the forms not marked as apocopated could in fact have been apocopated. I should accept your figure of 103. But I would be interested to see how these are distributed among the various books, and what the actual forms are. If they have a similar distribution to the paragogic he forms and nearly all end in he, that would suggest that they are apocopated forms with paragogic he rather than non-apocopated forms. This distinction may seem trivial as it has almost no surface effect, but it does have become significant if you use these forms as an argument against a Hebrew WAYYIQTOL being cognate with the shortened prefix form preterite in other Semitic languages.

None of these have been judged by the Westminster people to be WEYIQTOL forms. I am sorry that I doubted your data.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page