[b-hebrew] Judges 16:30 - Verb with no use, MY PROBLEM!
B. M. Rocine
brocine at twcny.rr.com
Wed Oct 4 18:44:15 EDT 2006
Below are some "late" examples of HYH clearly meaning "became" *without*
lamed. A couple cases have lamed in the sentence but not on the
Actually, most cases where lamed is used throughout the Tanakh refer to
the special case of the transfer of a thing from the possession of one
party to another.
2 Chr 17:12 vayhiy yehoshaphat holek vegadel `ad lema`elah
And Yehoshaphat continued to grow great...
Eze 19:3 kephiyr hayah
like a lion he became...
Eze 23:10 vattehiy shem lannashiym
she became famous...
Eze 35:15 shemamah tihyeh
desolate you will become...
Lam 3:14 hayiytiy sexoq lecol `ammiy
I became a joke to all my people...
Yonah Mishael wrote:
> Dear Bryan:
> I would really like evidence from outside of the Torah. I think there
> was a large span of time between the penning of the Torah narratives
> and that of Judges, and it would account for differences in language.
> I do not have time right now to look anything up, but I have assumed
> (I know this is risky business) that by the time of the writing of the
> Judges narrative, the use of HYH with a lamed prefix had become more
> standard. In the language of the Torah, the lamed prefix was not yet
> used as the standard mark of change with the HYH verb.
> I hope to be able to look into this later, but this is an assumption I
> have worked from for a little while. Do you have any information about
> HYH plus L-prefix as it may appear either in the Torah or in later
> On 10/4/06, B. M. Rocine <brocine at twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>> Dear Yonah:
>> Certainly, the root HYH does not require the complement le- to mean
>> "become." See Gen 3:22:
>> hen ha'adam hayah ke'axad mimmennu
>> "Look the man has become like one of us..."
>> Gen 19:26:
>> vattehiy netsiyb melax
>> "And she became a pillar of salt."
>> Gen 21:20
>> vayhiy robeh qashshat
>> "And he became an archer."
>> On the matter of a wayyiqtol of HYH specifically: We can't have it two
>> ways at once. If HYH is a copula, it would rarely if ever move the
>> story time of a narrative forward. If that's the case, the idea that
>> wayyiqtol is a storyline verb is weakened. On the other hand, if we
>> accept wayyiqtol as the storyline verb form, the idea that wayyiqtol of
>> HYH must refer to a happening or an occurrence of some sort is
>> strengthened. Wayyiqtol of HYH would refer to a situation that
>> "completed" or "became complete."
>> Yonah Mishael wrote:
>>> I would assume that the form WYHYW ויהיו in Judges 16:30 functions as
>>> most wa-cons forms do in a narrative—that is, it establishes this as a
>>> part of the main story line, by which the author is providing primary
>>> information. The point is the culmination of Samson's life as a fight
>>> against the Philistines, the loss of which caused the destruction of
>>> even more of his enemies than the entire period of his life had
>>> realized. This is what I get from it anyway. I don't think it
>>> necessarily has any "becoming" associated with it.
>>> Wouldn't it be most common by the time that the Judges was penned to
>>> express "become" with the HYH plus the L-prefix?
B. M. Rocine
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13026
More information about the b-hebrew