Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Dear Dave, 

You have some comments and a request:

>Bryan wrote:
> > 1.  X-qatal--->wayyiqtol
> > 
> > 2.  wayyiqtol--->X-qatal
> > 
> > Series (1), when found at the beginning of a narrative paragraph
(anywhere
> > in a pericope), will give antecedent information, describing the
situation
> > at the time when the following wayyiqtol pushes the narrative time
forward.
> >  I think this is your pluperfect idea, Peter.  
> > 
> > In (2), the X-qatal gives simultaneous (with the preceding wayyiqtol)
> > information.  It functions as a topicalizing clause; that is, it shifts
the
> > focus of the narrative from the layout of a plotline to the layout of
> > information which clarifies, contrasts with, or is simulataneous with
the
> > plotline.  Is pluperfect an accurate characterization of X-qatal in
this
> > second series?  Doesn't seem quite right to me.
> 
> About the only exception I can possibly see to these suggested 
> patterns involves negatives.  Since a WP can't be negated 
> (because the negative particle has to be clause-initial), another 
> form has to be used, yet the negative may not necessarily be 
> simultaneous with anything, e.g. "He went to her house.  He didn't 
> find her there.  He went back home."  Finding her not at home 
> must necessarily be sequential to going to her house, but it would 
> not be possible in Hebrew to use a WP for the second clause 
> because of the negation.  

That's a good point, worth thinking about some more.  I do have a small
contribution to the issue for now.  The negated clauses are generally
irrealis.  As such most negated clauses cannot be considered in quite the
same class as events; they are non-events.  I will admit, however, that
some negations do seem
awfully like events--just ask my wife whether my *not* putting my dirty
dishes in the dishwasher is an event.   I know, next time I'll suggest to
her that my sloth was a non-event and see what happens!   ;-) 

 
> 
> > In BH narrative text we often see the pattern
> > wayyiqtol-->(w)X-qatal-->wayyiqtol.  If there is indeed a difference in
> > function between series (1) and series (2) above, we must then be able
to
> > tell whether an X-qatal which is, in text, sandwiched between
wayyiqtols is
> > linked back to the preceding wayyiqtol or forward to the following. 
Does
> > the question mark below show the dilemma well enough?
> > 
> > wayyiqtol--->(w)X-qatal--->wayyiqtol
> >                   <----?---->
> 
> I think a real example or two would be helpful, at least to me...


Gen 31:33-34

vay.abo'--->veraxel loqxah--->vat.simem
                  <-----?----->

The question is whether the x-qatal clause in the middle is linked back to
the preceding wayyiqtol or forward to the following wayyiqtol.  The
paragraph break is between the vay.abo' and the veraxel loqxah, so the
x-qatal is linked forward and gives information that is antecedent to the
following wayyiqtol (rather than simultaneous or elaborative to the
preceding wayyiqtol).  How do we know the paragraph break is between
vay.abo' and veraxel loqxah?  vay.abo' , and what precedes it, is about the
activity of Laban.  What follows is about the activity of Rachel as well as
being about a different (in this case a prior) time.  The change in time
and main actant signifies a paragraph break.

2 Ki 5:24-25

vay$alax--->vay.eleku--->vehu' ba'--->vay.a`amod
                                   <---?--->

The question is whether the x-qatal clause, vehu' ba' , is linked forward
or backward.  This time there is no paragraph division within the series. 
All the events follow one cast of characters in one time.  In this case I
interpret the X-qatal to be simultaneous with the preceding wayyiqtol.  The
men went, while the servant of Elisha entered to his master.

1 Ki 19:3-4

vay.abo'--->vehu' halak--->vay.abo'
                <----?---->

I suggest a paragraph break after the X-qatal.  Until then the action is
about Elijah's journey to Beer-Sheba (with his servant apparently).  The
X-qatal itself spacially relates Elijah and the servant.  After the
X-qatal, the action is about Elijah, now explicitly alone, in a new place,
the wilderness.  Therefore, I would link the X-qatal backwards to Elijah's
leaving the servant in Beer-Sheva.  Rather than strictly simultaneous, I
would say this X-qatal is used to clarify the relative locations of Elijah
and his servant: "He made his servant stay there, but he, he was a goer
into the wilderness a day's journey."

Shalom,
Bryan


B. M. Rocine
Associate Pastor
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13208

315-437-6744(w)
315-479-8267(h)