Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net>]

Rolf wrote:
> Peter Kirk wrote:
> 
> 
> >1. I don't accept your proviso so I cannot your question.
> >2. Aramaic is a different language which may work quite differently.
> >

> ><snip> Provided that the element "wayy" in wayyiqtol can be explained on
> >phonological grounds, why must this (wa(yy) be more than a simple
> >conjunction, which moves the narrative forward, just as is the case of
> >Aramaic?
> >
> >
> >Regards
> >Rolf
> 
> 
> Dear Peter.
> 
> The Hebrew style is terse, no question about that. Even though Aramaic is a
> different language, it illustrates how a simple conjunction can move the
> story forward. Drop the provosio and tell me: Would the simple Hebrew
> conjunction w be able to move the story forward if it was attached to
> yiqtols just as do wayyiqtols. To state it differently: Is there any
> function of the wayyiqtol which is not compatible with the view that the
> construction simply is w+yiqtol?

Galia's book answers this question, and the answer is an 
unqualified "Yes."  The functions of the wayyiqtol and w+yiqtol are 
quite different.
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
A Bible that's falling apart means a life that isn't.