Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

On  04/28/99 (Alviero Niccacci -- Neg. Wayyiqtol) Lee R. Martin wrote:


> Dear Professor,
> In an earlier post you said, "-*lo' + yiqtol* is the negative counterpart
>of weqatal,"
> but below you have named it the "negative wayyiqtol."  I'm afraid that I
>do not
> understand why.   Your earlier post said that " *welo' + qatal*" is negative
> wayyiqtol. Could you explain again please.
>
> Studium Biblicum Franciscanum wrote:
>
> >
> > tik`aSennâ = x-yiqtol = apodosis = as ususal). Therefore Hannah wept
> > (wattibkeh = wayyiqtol = single event) and did not eat (welo' to'kal =
> > negative wayyiqtol = single event). »
>
Dear Lee Martin,

I must apologize--*welo' to'kal* is negative weqatal = background and
frequentative = "and was not eating / was refusing to eat."
Negative wayyiqtol would be **welo' 'akelâ*.
The following wayyiqtol continues the mainline started by* wattibkeh*,
while *welo' to'kal* makes a syntactic unit with it (foreground +
background).
Thank you for correcting me.
I shall reply to you concerning Deuteronomy 6:4-20 as soon as I have some
minutes to think about.

Peace and all good.
Alviero Niccacci

Studium Biblicum Franciscanum      Tel. +972 - 2 - 6282 936
POB 19424 - 91193 - Jerusalem      Fax  +972 - 2 - 6264 519
Israel

Home Page:     http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/sbf/SBFmain.html
Email          mailto:sbfnet AT netvision.net.il