Jer 15:6-9 - actually 6:1-6

peter_kirk at sil.org peter_kirk at sil.org
Thu Sep 23 22:19:13 EDT 1999


Let me now reply re Jer 6:1-6. See interleaved comments.

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re[3]: Jer 15:6-9
Author:  <furuli at online.no> at Internet
Date:    19/09/1999 01:48


<snip>

"Jeremiah, chapter 6 may give some parallel thoughts:

v1: The RT of the QATAL  must come after C (=future). 
PK: No, the point is that the disaster has already come become near or 
visible, the reason to flee has already become apparent. Note the 
perfect in LXX.

v2: The RT of the QATAL  must come after C (=future).
PK: This depends on the interpretation of this verse. NRSV reads "I 
have likened daughter Zion to the loveliest pasture." This seems odd 
in the context, but can DMH Qal really mean "destroy", and can its 
qatal really be future?

v3: The RT of the YIQTOL must come after C, and this demands that the 
same is true with the two QATALs.
PK: I wonder if the last two clauses of v.3 should be taken with the 
first three of v.4 as set of four lines. They are rather parallel in 
structure. I wonder if these two QATALs (clause initial, unusually) 
should be emended (pointing only) to imperatives. Yes, this is just 
the emendation I have complained about you making in Jer 27:18. But if 
you allow it in one place, you can't refuse it in another. 
Alternatively, one might point out that logically the attackers may 
already have pitched their camp before C and be preparing for an 
attack after C, i.e. the second half of the verse is a flashback.

v4: The RT of the WEYIQTOL(which has modal force) must come after C, and 
the QATAL and the YIQTOL covers exactly the same time period: RT either 
comes after C in both or coincides with C in both.
PK: This verse can hardly cover one time period as noon and evening are 
incompatible! NRSV makes the second part of the verse the response of the 
defenders, from different speakers with a different time perspective. In 
any case I would take PFNFH as perfect "the day has changed, noon has 
passed" and YINNF+UW as present "the shadows are lengthening".

v5: The RT of both WEYIQTOLs comes after C.
PK: Agreed.

v6: The RT must come after C in the second QATAL.
PK: This depends on the rather slippery semantics of PQD. Its basic 
meaning seems to be something like "remember, pay attention". The 
point of this hophal (unique in this sense) is perhaps that YHWH has 
already paid attention to Jerusalem and prepared his punishment 
against it.

There is no doubt that the setting is future, something which is shown by 
the 6 imperatives, the two YIQTOLs and the two WEYIQTOLs. The use of 5 
QATALs with future meaning in-between these other verbs is a strong 
argument in favour of QATAL being used with a true future meaning. So 
again, why cannot all the verbs in 15:6-7 have future meaning?"

PK: I do not accept that any of these five QATALs necessarily have 
future meaning. The meaning of a verb is a much more subtle concept 
than the time setting of the context in which it is placed. You used 
to insist just this when you (at great length and detail) rejected the 
argument that the meaning of WAYYIQTOL is past and sequential because 
in many passages it occurs in a past and sequential context. Have you 
shifted your position on that one? Or does "meaning" have a different 
meaning here and in your previous arguments? OK, I assume you are not 
claiming that future is an uncancellable component of the meaning of 
QATAL. But I really think you should take more care with your 
terminology.

<snip>




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list