Biblical Hebrew Forum

[yochanan bitan <ButhFam AT compuserve.com>]

> 1:4 Did the sons of Naomi marry Moabite women and thereafter live about
ten
> years in Moab, or did the ten years start before their marriages?

verse 2 'hayah' implies a temporary stay. then the father died, then the
sons married, then ten years were spent.

you could have added 1.6-7 vattashov 'and she returned', 
only the beginning happened in verse 6 but the end didn't come until 1.19.
at least we agree that on this verse te verb is not very perfective.
(two-category verb systems are not very black and white. describe them how
you want, just don't absolutely sever either tense or aspect.)

> 1:9-10 Did the women first raise their voice and then weep, or did both
> things occur together?

this is a special rhetorical feature, 'hendiadys', like 'answered and
said'. and there are many special examples when a language only uses two
main verb categories.

> 1:19 Was the whole town first stirred and then the women exclaimed "Can
> this be Naomi"?, or did both things occur at the same time?

first the stirring, then the conversation. if you feel this is a little bit
artificial, then remember that plural statements "they said" are always
artificial unless there is a chorus speaking in unison.

> 2:6,11 Did the foreman first answer and then reply, or is this one and
the
> same thing?

hendiadys,

> 2:23 Did Ruth first stay close to the maidens and then she started to
live
> with her mother-in-law, or did Ruth live with her mother-in-law before
she
> met the maidens?

she lived with her mother-in-law after she met boaz' girls. the sentence
does not speak about when this began. the author didn't want to specify
"continued to stay, she did not leave" since continuity was obvious.

> 3:7 Did Boaz first eat, then drink and then be in good spirits, or did
all
> three things occur together?

he first ate and drank, a natural hendiadys, then was in good spirits.

> How would those of you who do not accept that a qatal without we has
future
> meaning explain the qatal mkr in 4:3? Can the selling be anything but
> future in relation the deictic center which was speech time?

three readings exist:
a. refers to a past selling, no`omi had already sold the property. but in
talmud a goel is only allowed to redeem after a minimum of two years and
ruth had only been in bethlehem for three months.
b. vocalize as participle to make this unremarkable syntax.
c. read as performative: no`omi hereby sells/has sold=offers for sale. this
fits context best and two more examples occur later in this chapter: i
hereby buy ... buy 4.9-10.
"c" is convincing and would be understood by those in the city gate,
especially after having been been specially invited for a legal process.
not just ten witnesses, presumably no`omi and some women, too.

the question with a hebrew verb is what it is referring to and why it was
chosen? with only two major categories to cover all relationships of time
or aspect or mood there will be many fuzzy lines and it will certainly
conflict with a language that uses more categories. 

braxot 
randall buth