<wayyiqtol> again

Studium Biblicum Franciscanum sbfnet at netvision.net.il
Thu Dec 30 03:09:57 EST 1999

>Professor Niccacci:
>Could it be that the distinction between the historical narrative and the
>direct speech in these cases is because of the relative contemporaneity of
>the direct speech narratives in each case?  In each of the above examples,
>the narrative is first person; perhaps the initial qatal indicates the
>relative proximity, in time and perhaps personal interest, of the events
>narrated.  Conversely, if a native BH speaker was narrating a story that was
>generations removed, might they begin with a wayyiqtol?
>Thanks, and God bless you!
>Joe A. Friberg

Dear Dr. Joe A. Friberg,

Thank you for your comment. It may be that, as you say, the choice of 
qatal indicates the relative proximity in time and personal interest.
In my previous post, I pointed out a fact that seems to me highly 
relevant. The appearance of first-second person depends on the 
situation of the oral narrative in direct speech--in historical 
narrative only the third person appears. Unlike modern narrators, the 
Biblical narrator never shows up in the first person and never 
addresses the reader in the second.
	I doubt that the use of qatal versus wayyiqtol is a question 
of proximity versus removedness. Actually, I think that whatever is 
narrated orally comes into proximity with the narrator and with the 
listener/reader irrespective of its chronological distance.
The fact remains that we do not have any evidence of an oral 
narrative beginning with wayyiqtol.

Thanks, and peace and all good for the New Year 2000.

Alviero Niccacci

Studium Biblicum Franciscanum      Tel. +972 - 2 - 6282 936
POB 19424 - 91193 - Jerusalem      Fax  +972 - 2 - 6264 519
Home Page:
Email  mailto:sbfnet at netvision.net.il

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list