Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Studium Biblicum Franciscanum <sbfnet AT netvision.net.il>]

Title: Re: 2Ki 20:7 and Isa 38:21

Dear Rolf,

Sorry, did I miss a previous question of yours?

>From our previous exchange concerning 2Kgs 20:7 and Isa 38:21 I thought that the problem text was 2Kgs not Isa 38:21. It seems clear to me that Hezekiah's request of a sign in v. 22 follows Isaiah's order in the previous verse, i.e. Hezekiah requests a sign in order to believe Isaiah's assertion.
My point was that, despite the fact that the two texts relate parallel accounts, they show different perspectives. In 2Kgs Hezekiah's healing is related as an event ("and he recovered") soon after Isaiah's order of bringing the cake of figs, and then the details are given; differently in Isaiah the healing is presented as a goal ("that he may recover"), and then the  event is narrated in a linear sequence. Do you think differently?

BTW I have been following your discussion with Peter Kirk (if I am not mistaken). If you are interested, I would propose my analysis of another text with double transmission, namely 2Sam 22:38 and Psa 18:38. Applying the knowledge gained from the prose, I would translate the two texts as follows:

- 2Sam 22,38 "(Every time) I was pursuing (yiqtol) my enemies, I DESTROYED THEM (wayyiqtol), I used not to turn back until consuming them".
- Psa 18:38 "(Every time) I was pursuing (yiqtol) my enemies IN ORDER TO REACH THEM (weyiqtol), I used not to come back until consuming them".

Again, the two versions seem to show different perspectives. Wayyiqtol and weyiqtol need not to be taken as interchangeable. Actually, in my opinion they are not.

In the same posting referred to above, you  mention that you have 67 examples of weyiqtol's and more than 500 examples of yiqtol's with past meaning. While the 500 examples pose no problem to me, the 67 do. It is a fact that yiqtol as well as weqatal are used with past reference in narrative--both in historical narrative and in oral narrative. Specifically, yiqtol (actually x-yiqtol, that is second-place yiqtol) and weqatal are used to convey description, or custom (i.e. they have frequentative meaning), while wayyiqtol and qatal express single events (i.e. they have perfective meaning).
However, for me weyiqtol is volitive, and therefore I do not expect it to have past reference. I only know of a couple of cases which contradict such assumption, though I think that they are special and their import should be weighed against the cases that suggest a volitive meaning. That is why I am interested in seeing your 67 examples of weyiqtol's with past meaning. Are you ready to provide the list?

As you know already, I am rather pragmatic. Life may be too short for me to produce an overall theory--even if I would ever be able to produce it, and also too short to review all the evidence. I prefer to proceed gradually. From the analysis of texts I try to draw a theory as soon as possible, in order then to proceed to analysing more texts and testing and refining the theory until it seems sufficiently ascertained. I try my best to remain open to suggestions and change. My approach is inductive not deductive.

Peace and all good.

Alviero Niccacci

On  03/10/99 (2Ki 20:7 and Isa 38:21) you wrote:


> Dear Alviero,
>
> I know you are a busy man, but could you please answer a yes or no to the
> following question:  Would you say that the question of Isaiah 38:22 came
> after the account of v 21?

> Rolf Furuli
> Lecturer in Semitic languages
> University of Oslo