Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Alleged "prophetic tense"

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Barry H." <nebarry AT verizon.net>
  • To: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: "b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Alleged "prophetic tense"
  • Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2012 22:05:23 -0500

Thanks. I'd also like to hear from our esteemed moderators and Jerry Shepherd, if available.

Sent from my iPhone
N.E. Barry Hofstetter 

On Dec 1, 2012, at 8:46 PM, K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com> wrote:

Barry:

I don’ty know of any published articles in journals that deal specifically with this question. However, I have published on this list reasons why this “prophetic tense” is a fallacy.

The so-called “prophetic tense” comes from the belief that the Qatal form of verbs codes for the past tense. While that is true for modern Hebrew, and I’m not sure for how much earlier, it’s not true for Biblical Hebrew. In Biblical Hebrew, the Qatal and Yiqtol forms code for neither tense nor aspect, rather for mood: the basic moods being primary vs. secondary moods. Hence, future events written about in Qatal form refers to a primary use of the verb, indicative, of an event that has not yet come.

The Yiqtol secondary use is also secondary to the subjunctive mood, as well as indicating results of the primary verb, intent and continuation of narrative.

It seems to me that sometimes the choice of Qatal or Yiqtol might be related to grammatical use, but that impression may merely be the result of poor understanding of the text on my part.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:00 AM, Barry <nebarry AT verizon.net> wrote:
I'm writing an essay in response to some people who are seriously
misusing the concept. My argument is that it doesn't really exist, not
even as a usage. That a particular passage may be prophetic has nothing
to do with the particular aspect of the verbs employed, but the context
of the passage and how it is then subsequently understood in the history
of interpretation (I'm especially thinking of canonical interpretation,
but not restricted to that). I'd appreciate any comments on this, or
references to any published discussions beyond the apologetically driven
"articles" I've seen on various web pages.


--
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Semper melius Latine sonat
The American Academy
http://www.theamericanacademy.net
The North American Reformed Seminary
http://www.tnars.net
Bible Translation Magazine
http://www.bible-translation.net

http://my.opera.com/barryhofstetter/blog



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page