Biblical Hebrew Forum

[yochanan bitan <ButhFam AT compuserve.com>]

(rolf wrote)
> What we are
> discussing, is the *semantic meaning* of wayyiqtol and weqatal, whether
it
> is different or similar to yiqtol and qatal respectively.

exactly. 
and in ex 26 it is clear that vayyiqtol equals qatal in semantic meaning
(not pragmatics)
and in ex 36 it is clear that veqatal equals yiqtol in semantic meaning
(not pragmatics).
so why don't people on-list acknowledge the obvious?
then residuals can be dealt with as residuals and definitions of 'verb
color' can proceed on-line.

irrelevant is that fact that veqatal in 36.29 is NOT a "simple past", 
but very much relevant is the fact that the pragmatic complement in the
verse 36.29 is YIQTOL. 
The broad equivalency of veqatal and yiqtol in its "verbal color" is, and
always has been, very clear to readers of biblical hebrew. 

braxot
randall buth