Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Bryan wrote  re. the ubabboqer clause in question:

>
> . . .
> That the X-qatal is "just as
> >mainline"?  no.  It is uboqer that moves the time forward, not the verb
> >form.
>

Galia wrote,

>
>         I agree.

Actually, I agree also that it is the context, not the verb form, that moves 
the time
forward in this case.  It's just that I would say the same thing about 
wayyiqtol;
there's nothing inherent in the verb form that moves the time forward, as is 
evident
from the many cases where wayyiqtol is used when time is moving backwards or 
standing
still.

Which leads me to ask, Galia, concerning your statement that "My statistical 
findings
show that 94% of wayyiqtol clauses ARE sequential. 6% are not, 3% of which I 
explain
as formulas or parapharases and 3% I cannot explain."

The question is, how do you treat contextually ambiguous cases, i.e. where 
the context
does not require (but does permit) a sequential interpretation?

Regards,

John Ronning