Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Sequential?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Moon-Ryul Jung" <moon AT saint.soongsil.ac.kr>
  • To: b-hebrew
  • Subject: Re: Sequential?
  • Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 19:21:26


On 04/26/99, ""Lee R. Martin" <lmartin AT vol.com>" wrote:
> Are the wayyiqtols in Gen. 12:4-5 sequential?
>
> Abram departed (wayyiqtol), as the LORD had spoken unto him;
> and Lot went (wayyiqtol) with him: ...
> And Abram took (wayyiqtol) Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son ...
>
> and they went forth (wayyiqtol) to go into the land of Canaan;
> so they came (wayyiqtol) to the land of Canaan..
>
>
Dear Lee:
Though I am not in a position to say anything significant, I would like
to tell you how I am trying to understand this issue of "sequentiality".

Perhaps it may help to repeat here what Niccacci said on his March 8 post
(
Re 2Ki:7). He quoted examples similar to the above before his conclusion:

[Niccacci]
(1) Gen 37:21 "Reuben heard it, he delivered him out of their hands, and
said, Let us not take his life." + 37:22 (Reuben gives the brothers his
advise) "in order to rescue him out of their hand, to restore him to his
father."==The rescuing itsel happened after 37:22.
- (2) 2 Sam 5:7 "Nevertheless David took the stronghold of Zion, that is,
the city of David" + 5:8 "David said on that day, Whoever would smite the
Jebusites, let him strike the water channel.."==The taking of Zion happened
after David's words in 5:8.
- (3) Josh 2:4 "The woman took the two men and hid each one of them
(separately) and said..." + 2:6 "Now she had brought them up to the roof,
and hid them with the stalks..."==In 2:4 the hiding of the spies is quickly
narrated; once the emergency is over, 2:6 resumes the information of 2:4
and adds the details of the hiding.
Another possible case is Judg 4:18 versus 4:19. I would refer to my
_Lettura sintattica della prosa ebraico-biblica_ (1991), pages 157 and
210.


In these cases, apparently the narrator wants to inform the reader from the
outset of the outcome of the event, and afterwards he narrates the
details.
Similarly in 2 Kgs 20:7 the narrator first gives the final outcome of the
event, then the details.

[Moon] I think the shifting from the statement of final outcome to
the description of the details is difficult to mark by verb forms.
It should be indicated by other means, e.g. adverbials or context or
the world knowledge. So, if wayyiqtol is sequential at a given level of
description, then we could well think that wayyiqtol signals
sequentiality.

[Niccacci]
Further, there is no justification in translating with a pluperfect the
wayyiqtol's in Josh 2:4, e.g. "But the woman had taken the two men and
hidden them..." (RSV, similarly JPS). If and when the writer wishes to
indicate anteriority (i.e. a "recovered" piece of information) he uses not
wayyiqtol but x-qatal as in Josh 2:6.

[Moon]
I agree. I think that providing a detail to the summarized event is
quite different from providing background information. For example,
consider:

(a) He went to the flower store.
(b) Mary had asked him to buy a bundle of rose.

(b) provides background information for (a), in this case,
a sort of reason for (a). It is more than just providing
some antecedent details.

If we just wanted to provide a detail for the event whose
summary was presented, we would not use past perfect
forms. Similarly, while x-qatal can describe antecedent
situations, the implied logical connection between the x-qatal
and the previous wayyiqtol seems too strong
for the purpose of providing details to the previous event.

Cheers!

Moon-Ryul Jung
Assistant Professor
Dept of Computer Science
Soongsil University
Seoul, Korea



  • Sequential?, Lee R. Martin, 04/26/1999
    • <Possible follow-up(s)>
    • Re: Sequential?, Moon-Ryul Jung, 04/26/1999

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page