Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Andrew

Smith's book is a fine work and should not be neglected in a study of
Hebrew verbs. While reading it, we should have in mind what  his basic
premise is (p XI)  , namely, that wayyiqtol is a survival of "NWS *yaqtul
preterite". His conclusions are not better than his premise.

The book has a very fine discussion in WAYYIQTOL at Qumran with a list of
occurrences. However, his list is hardly complete.  He says (p 50) that
there are no "converted imperfects" (perhaps except one) in the Temple
Scroll.  For example, he lists WYMT "and he shall die." in LXIV 8 as an
"unconverted imperfect" (weyiqtol). However, this verb is apocopated which
would suggest a wayyiqtol. In the Bible, we find 71 examples (21%) of
apocopated WEYIQTOLS, and 1 Kings 21:10 is similar to the WYMT in the
Temple Scroll. However, in  LXIV 11 we have the full form in a similar
clause (also L 10), showing that they used both forms. (I see another
wayyiqtol with past meaning in LXV 8). Given his premise, Smith could
hardly analyse a form with future meaning as WAYYIQTOL, and this
illustrates that premises play an extremely important role in the
interpretation of verbs.


Regards
Rolf

Rolf Furuli
Lecturer in Semitic languages
University of Oslo



>Dear list,
>
>Has anyone read Mark Smith's book "The origin and development of the
>waw-consecutive" (or something like that)?
>
>What do you think of it? Is it a good analysis?
>
>cheers,
>Andrew
>--
>Andrew S. Kulikovsky B.App.Sc(Hons) MACS