Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter_Kirk AT SIL.ORG]

Thank you for these examples. To me these are not real exceptions to 
the rule mentioned before:

Cases at start of paragraph:

Gen 21:1: I think the time line of Genesis suggests that Sarah was 
already pregnant before the stay in Gerar (ch.20). At least only one 
year passed between 17:1,24 and 21:5.

Gen 14:1-2: The text is probably corrupt, but this also is very likely 
a flashback: this war was very likely already going on when Abram 
moved to Mamre 13:18.

Gen 15:1: Perhaps the pluperfect meaning can be explicitly cancelled 
in such a case.

Cases within a story: These mostly fit the pattern mentioned before of 
wayyiqtol... w-X qatal which (as Bryan mentioned before) indicate 
pairs of events which are taken together, simultaneous or at least 
viewed as such

Gen 18:7: This and 18:6 can hardly be simultaneous (we don't actually 
know the ordering), but I guess the point is to emphasise the hurry by 
suggesting that Abraham's visits to the tent and to the herd were all 
but simultaneous.

Gen 41:52: again a pair with 41:51. I guess the children are taken as 
twins named on the same occasion rather than in succession; the second 
name may have been given before the first explanation.

Gen 19:10: They pulled Lot inside as they were shutting the door, 
simultaneous.

Gen 40:22: Pharaoh's two decrees are taken as simultaneous.

Gen 19:24: This one can be a flashback: already, before Lot reached 
Zoar and could see what had happened, the Lord had rained down 
sulphur, and Lot's wife had been turned to a pillar of salt (having 
looked back on the journey). Or does this view contradict v.22? 
Actually the two X-qatal's in v.23 make this situation even more 
complex.

Judges 6:21: The angel disappeared simultaneouly with, or before, the 
meat was burned up.

Exodus 9:23: Immediacy emphasised by stating simultaneity? YHWH 
certainly did not need to wait for Moses' action.

Jonah 1:4: Harder to explain, but perhaps a point is being made as in 
Exodus 9:23 that YHWH's actions do not depend on men's but have been 
prepared in advance. Modern meteorologists would agree that the wind 
was already on its way!

Conclusion: You have not yet found clear and unambiguous examples of X 
+ qatal introducing a clearly sequential event or story, rather than a 
simultaneous event (or one treated as such) or a flashback.

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator 
_________________________________
Subject: Gen 4:1, X + qatal (Lee, Bryan, Peter, Randall)
Author:  ronning AT ilink.nis.za at internet 
Date:    05/02/1999 23:12


"Lee R. Martin" wrote:
<snip>

Thanks, Lee, I don't have Niccacci but following up your 
reference to Lambdin I see he agrees that Gen 4:1 is not 
pluperfect - he lists Gen 4:1 as an example of a disjunctive 
"indicating either the completion of one episode or the beginning 
of another: (p. 164). Another example he gives in that category 
with X + qatal is Gen 21:1 (maybe debatable, depending on what 
paqad refers to); also Gen 22:1 (agreeing with the interpretation 
I
gave yesterday), and Gen 14:1 and 15:1.

For X + qatal within a story that is sequential, I would add Gen 
18:7
we'el habbaqar rats 'Avraham also Gen 41:52 we'eth shem 
hashsheniy qara' 'Ephrayim (sequential with wayyiqra', v. 51).

Others could be sequential:
Gen 19:10 wayyishlexu . . . wayyabiy'u . . . we'eth haddeleth 
sagaru
(could be nearly simultaneous, but not completely, I think) 
Gen 40:22 we'eth sar ha'ophim talah

Bryan, don't these examples (and Randall's - Jon 1:4, Judg 6:21, 
Exod 9:23, Gen 19:24) violate the "rule" you quoted (if I 
remember correctly from a couple months ago) that "qatal never 
advances the story line," or something to that effect?

<snip>