1 Kings 11:18
596547 at ican.net
Tue Sep 8 09:35:17 EDT 1998
Did you get a response to your question? I don't recall one, so I'll have
a go even though a bit late. I think your answer may be had in how we see
the boundaries between the clauses. Unless I'm misunderstanding, you are
judging that _)amar_ begins a clause, and you are putting _welexem_ with
the previous clause. But we can apply a "rule" of syntax to place
_welexem_ with the _)amar_-clause instead. Rule: After a historical
narrative has begun, qatal is never found in the first position of a
clause. I describe this syntax as X-qatal. In this case, the _welexem_ is
the "X." I might translate literally "and it was of bread that he was a
sayer to him" and the translations are correct, I think, in their relating
this clause to Pharoah's providing for Hadad.
There is one case in prose in which the qatal is common in the first
position of a clause. That is when the clause itself is the first clause
of an *oral* historical narrative. In other words, when a historical
narrative is "within quotation marks," the narrative may have an opening
clause which begins with a qatal.
> From: Paul Zellmer <zellmer at cag.pworld.net.ph>
> Date: Friday, September 04, 1998 11:22 PM
> The last few clauses in 1 Kings 11:18 (with the arrival in Egypt) read:
> WAY.FBO)W. MIC:RAYIM )EL-P.AR:(OH MELEK:-MIC:RAYIM W)Y.IT.EN-LOW BAYIT
> W:LEXEM )FMAR LOW W:)EREC NFTAN LOW
> My question is concerns the *'amar lo*. I'm not quite sure what to do
> with it. It's not wayyiqtol. Is it a qal qatal verb clause, like it
> appears on the surface, meaning, "He said to him"? That doesn't make a
> lot of sense in this context.
> The English versions I have here are either ignoring it or making it
> part of the concept of provisions, but I haven't found support for that
> type of idiom. What am I missing?
B. M. Rocine
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13208
More information about the b-hebrew