Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Hi John,

You wrote:
> 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?

I don't remember just how I said it, or the context.  The rule, while
perhaps not absolute, is overwhelming.   Given world knowledge, some of the
above examples *could* be sequential and therefore moving story time
forward.  However, I think only one, Jon 1:4, is a clear example of an
X-qatal which moves forward the story time.  We are therefore still able to
interpret the others as simultaneous, etc.  (FWIW, I think Niccacci uses
Exo 9:23 or one very much like it as an example of how the series
wayyiqtol--->X-qatal is used to express simultaneity.) 

I would imagine any clause type can advance the story-line of a narrative
if the world knowledge of the reader over-rides the typical significance of
the pragmatic convention.  One reason is because the reading activity
itself implies the forward movement of story time.    The propositions
represented by each clause come to the reader during the reading process in
a sequence, because of the somewhat linear nature of the reading activity. 
The reading experience therefore has a kind of "reading time," which is
very easily interpreted as the forward movement of story time.  As we
analyze any one clause which seems to move forward the story time, the
question is what mechanism or combination of mechanisms moves the story
time forward.  In BH the wayyiqtol can do it by virtue of its inherent
meaning.  I suppose the X-qatal may do it exceptionally by virtue of the
reader's world knowledge, the reading process itself, and maybe some other
stuff.

> 
> Peter wrote, concerning Gen 22:1:
> >An interesting example. I wonder if this rather odd collocation of 
> >verb forms can be seem as some kind of seam. Perhaps 21:22-22:1a 
> >(up to HF)"L.EH) was added later; for without this 22:1b flows on 
> >nicely, including the flashback, from 21:21. Perhaps we are meant 
> >to read 22:1a with 21:22a as an inclusio, so that 22:1b refers 
> >back in its time sequence to 21:21. Can anyone find out if this 
> >sequence of verb forms is regular or unique?
> 
> Lambdin says "It is interesting to note that a disjunction may be
> preceded by a temporal clause.  In this case the disjunction must
> be understood as applying before the clause with wayehi [then he
> cites Gen 22:1] because a new episode may always be introduced,
> like a new paragraph, with no conjunction at all, such as [Gen
> 15:1 'axar haddevarim ha'elleh hayah devar Y' 'el 'avraham]."
> 
> I think he's saying that that the wayehi clause is not the start
> of the story in Gen 22:1, that we should treat Gen 22:1 just like
> Gen 15:1 (I don't think he put it too well, but maybe I'm
> misunderstanding him).
> 

I think the x-qatal in Gen 22:1,  veha'elohim nissah 'et 'abraham, is an
interesting case.  It presents God as an actant in the following pericope
in an introductory manner.  It is not an event at all, as is the case with
a great many X-qatal clauses in BH prose (such as Gen 1:1 which we
discussed recently).  My understanding of the qatal verb form as being
attributive or adjectival makes some interesting sense out of this clause. 
I believe the meaning of the first two clauses of v. 1 is "after these
things it was the God who was tester of Abraham."  In the pericope that
follows there is an almost excruciating tension between what we the reader
know and what Abraham can only know by a great ordeal: that ha'elohim is a
tester of Abraham only.  Hearing the narrative for the first time, the
suspense of being "in-the-know" invites a reader to somehow jump into the
narrative and inform Abraham of this tidbit of information that could so
help him.  It's the same kind of suspense that occurs in a movie when we
the viewers know that the solution to all the movie's problems is right at
hand but the protagonist is oblivious to it.  Well, the neat thing in Gen
22 is that Abraham, while blind to the mechanism the Lord will use to save
Yitzak, does have faith that the Lord sees the solution.  The first reading
in my book is Gen 22.

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)