Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re[5]: wayyiqtol test, dave:necessary

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: peter_kirk AT SIL.ORG
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re[5]: wayyiqtol test, dave:necessary
  • Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 23:07:26 -0500


Dear Moon,

You wrote:

1 Sam 28:3 retrieves the first piece of information with a
non-narrative
construction [x+qatal]; then it goes with CONTINUATION wayyiqtol:
(2)
(a) Now Samuel had died [x+qatal]
(b) and all Israel had made lament [wayyiqtol] for him
(c) and they had buried him [Idem].

<snip>

To preserve the similarity or symmetry between the mainline of the
narrative and a digression, I would translate 1 Sam 28:3 as follows:

(3)
(a) Now Samuel had died [x+qatal]
(b) All Israel made lament [wayyiqtol] for him
(c) They buried him [Idem].

Notice that wayyiqtols after x-qatal are translated to simple past
clauses.
If many English speakers like (3) better than (2), it may be
considered
another evidence that English simple past is quite similar to
wayyiqtol.

I like (3) better than (2)...

Peter Kirk's reply:

I am afraid that I, as a native English speaker, prefer (2) to (3).
Obviously the translators of the English version you quote did so
also, and not just those translators; NRSV, RSV, NIV, TEV, CEV, REB
all use a string of past perfects here (New Living Translation uses
three past perfects and one simple past in this verse); of the modern
translations I have here, only NJV follows your (3). (Could the Jewish
translators be so immersed in b-hebrew that their English syntax is
drawn to the Hebrew model?) I do not absolutely reject (3), but to me
it seems colloquial and inappropriate to a formal text such as a Bible
translation (or one using high-level and archaic phrases like "made
lament"). So I am afraid that we must conclude that this is a place
where Hebrew and English differ, and that English does not preserve
nice symmetries etc.

By the way, I looked also at French versions. BFC, TOB and Segond all
use a series of plus-que-parfaits at this point. This casts some doubt
on the observation that French plus-que-parfait is continued with
passe simple. LXX and Russian both read as if Samuel's death was
sequential with verse 2.

You do not mention the last clause of this verse, another X-qatal
which seems to be a further flashback to a time before Samuel's death;
at least this is an action which seems to fit better with the picture
of the early part of Saul's reign. The English of most of the Bible
versions has no way of indicating the further flashback, which is
indicated in the Hebrew by the further X-qatal and in NJV by a second
past perfect.

Peter Kirk







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page