[b-hebrew] 998 non-past wyyqtl's

Dave Washburn dwashbur at nyx.net
Mon Nov 29 14:14:16 EST 2004


On Sunday 28 November 2004 06:57, B. M. Rocine wrote:

[snip]
> Take your example of two wayyiqtols in Jer 51:29.  The consensus among the
> five or six modern translators I checked is that the wayyiqtols are
> non-past; they differ on whether to translate them as present or future.  I
> quickly vote future with you.  I do not, however, think the text is
> evidence that the wayyiqtols are not perfective.  The perfectivity of the
> forms is utilized to explicitly embed sequentiality into the text.  I think
> translations should use the word *then* or *so*:  "Then the land will
> quake, then it will writhe for the thoughts of YHWH stand against Babel."

Bryan,
Would you insist that they use the word "then" or "so" in Judges 12:9-14 as 
well?

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"No good.  Hit on head."   -Gronk



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list