Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Bryan Rocine" <596547 AT ican.net>]

Shalom Lee!

I have to differ with you in my exegesis of Niccacci 158.  The passage to
which I think you refer goes like this: "In terms of what we know about  H
syntax it has to said that these examples of a continuation weQATAL
denoting the past are exceptional.  The tense shift WAYYIQTOL-->weQATAL
does occur, it is true, but it marks a distinct interruption of the
narrative flow, with the transition from narrative to comment, and the
weQATAL denotes a repeated action(sect. 46)."  I take his phrase
"continuation weQATAL" to refer to the single weqatal which refers to a
*single past action*(like we see in Jdg 3:23).  This he calls exceptional
syntax, *in contrast*, I believe, to the more customary(pun intended)
series X-yiqtol-->weQATAL or occasional WAYYIQTOL-->weWATAL which
represents discursive stance or "comment" and repeated, habitual activity
in the past.  Niccacci admits a single weqatal with the value of a
preterite, but does not claim, like Longacre does, to know its function. 
N. closes his section 158 with the comment, "...we might be tempted to
correct the text and this is just what scholars do.  However, in my opinion
it would be prudent to collect other examples and classify them in orde to
obtain a wider picture before forming a definitive conclusion."

Personally, I think the clarity of expression may have lost something in
its journey from Italian to English, no criticism of Watson intended.  

----------
> From: Lee R. Martin <lmartin AT vol.com>
> To: Bryan Rocine <596547 AT ican.net>
> Cc: Hebrew List <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Subject: RE: weqatal in Jdg 3:23
> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 1998 4:04 PM
> 
> Dear Bryan,
> See Niccicci, section 158
> 
> I think the weqatal after wayyiqtol signals a change from *narration* to
> *comment*!
> 
> Lee R. Martin
> 
> How about that crazy weqatal in Jdg 3:23?   My tanslation:"And Ehud went
> out(wayyiqtol) porchward(?), and closed(wayyiqtol) the doors of the
> roof-room upon him[Eglon], and was a 'locker'(weqatal: _w:na(al_  ).
> 
> 
> Where on this scale of views do you folks fall and why?
>