Biblical Hebrew Forum

[peter_kirk AT SIL.ORG]

John Ronning wrote to Prof. Niccacci:

<long snip>

I'm sorry I've lost your message that I was thinking of (something to do 
with instructions for the tabernacle or maybe offerings for the 
dedication of the tabernacle or consecration of Aaron and his sons) - I 
thought you had shown that in the instructions both weqatal and x-yiqtol 
were used, and in the description of the completion, both were described 
with wayyiqtols; thus both weqatal and x-yiqtol were "mainline."  I was 
suggesting the same is true for historical narrative - both wayyiqtol and 
sometimes x + qatal are mainline.  I was asking what type of evidence you 
would have to see to agree that x + qatal can be "mainline" in historical 
narrative.

<snip>

(PK): Did Prof. Niccacci really show this, or has there been some 
confusion here? If I remember rightly, there is a clear rule that 
weqatal in the instructions for the tabernacle etc is replaced by 
wayyiqtol in the narrative of the construction, and x-yiqtol is 
replaced by x-qatal; this suggests that weqatal and wayyiqtol are 
mainline and x-yiqtol and x-qatal are background, within these 
discourses.

Peter Kirk