Biblical Hebrew Forum

[John Ronning <ronning AT ilink.nis.za>]

Bryan  wrote:

>  . . .
>  Anyhow, there are no doubt many
> sequence-initial wayyiqtols.  Can a sequential form be sequence-initial?
> What do you think?

Dear Bryan,

I guess one can always find something in the past with which
any verb can be sequential (and if the past action isn't
explicitly stated you can say it's implied!), but my
approach would be to render it in English with the word
"then" in front of it and ask if it's a useful concept for
the BH interpreter.  I personally don't.  Gen 4:25 "Then
Adam knew his wife again. . ."  The use of "then" has to
make you look to the preceding to find out "when," which
would be quite confusing in these cases, so it seems to me
wayyiqtol can't have this "then" force, even if it would
USUALLY be an appropriate translation. 

Another example I used (not paragraph initial):
Exod 4:20 
wayyiqqax    Then Moses took his wife and his sons
wayyarkivem  then he mounted them on a donkey, 
wayyashob    then he returned to the land of Egypt. 
                (perfective > complete action > he arrived
                in Egypt?)
wayyiqqax    then Moses took the staff of God in his hand

3 out of 4 "thens" make sense but the last I think tells us
the BH writer needs no special permission to depart from
chronological sequence when using wayyiqtols  >> the last
must be simply "Moses also took"


It did occur, to me, however, that perhaps there is a way
for us to reach agreement - you described well some reasons
for why the narrator may depart from the usual sequential
narration of
events.  I think such analysis is quite useful as a
description of the story-telling technique, as long as we
can divorce it from the idea of an inherently sequential
meaning of the form.  Is that a possibility?

Shalom leka,

John