Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

 On  05/07/99 (Re[5]: Tidbits from Ruth (Alviero)) Peter Kirk wrote:


> Dear Prof. Niccacci,
> 
> Many thanks for your help and for clarifying the issues here. I think

> the main clarification was that it is apparently only INITIAL x-yiqtol 
> in direct speech becomes wayyiqtol in historical narrative. The word

> "initial" had somewhere dropped out of the discussion.
> 
> However, as far as I can see the parallel at Exodus 26:1 w-X-yiqtol || 
> 36:8 wayyiqtol is unique within these instructions (at least I have 
> checked all the paragraph initial possibilities) and may be affected

> by the change of subject and the dislocation of the order of the 
> parallels. It could easily be that 36:8 was originally initial and 
> w-X-qatal and was changed into wayyiqtol when it was put into the 
> context of 36:7 and so became non-initial. It would be interesting to

> see other examples of this parallelism which could not have been 
> affected in this way.
> 
> I suppose the problem is that the only truly initial historical 
> narrative is almost by definition Genesis 1:1. There at least we 
> probably have X-qatal. We might then end up with a simple table 
> something like:
> 
>                 Historical narrative    Instruction
> 
> Initial         X-qatal (Gen 1:1 only)  X-yiqtol
> 
> Continuation    wayyiqtol               weqatal
> 
> Offline         X-qatal                 X-yiqtol
> 
> Habitual        X-yiqtol                X-yiqtol
> 
> How does this agree with your thinking? This is still material which

> we are considering "non-volitive" although I am not sure how well 
> that fits into the idea of instruction. Presumably none of the 
> X-yiqtols above will be apocopated e.g. we find non-apocopated 
> T.A(:A&EH in 26:1 (initial) and 26:4 (offline), in contrast with the

> wayyiqtols, as always apocopated e.g. WAY.A(A& in 36:11. Can volitive

> material i.e. imperatives, jussives and apocopated weyiqtol be fitted

> into such a scheme?
> 

Dear Peter Kirk,

Your table is fine in my opinion. Thank you.
I would only add weqatal in the column of Historical Narrative for Habitual. Actually x-yiqtol is auxiliary to weqatal, which is the main verbform used to convey habit, description. On its part, x-yiqtol expresses what I call background, i.e. contrast, simultaneity, comparison, or emphasis on the X element, according to context. Thus x-yiqtol expresses background to weqatal, which on its turn expresses background to mainline wayyiqtol in historical narrative.

A good example is Exod. 18:25-26 (already partly quoted in the past):

(mainline) (25) wayyibxar mo$eh 'an$ê-xayil ... "Moses chose men of value..."
(background 1) (26) we$apeTû wet ha`am bekol-`et "Now, they used to judge the people  at all times--"
(background 2) 'et-haddabar haqqa$eh yebîw'ûn 'el-mo$eh "(They did it thisway--) everey hard case they used to bring it to Moses"
(background 2, coordinated) wekol-haddabar haqqaTon yi$pûTû hem "and everysmall matter they used to judge themselves."

BTW, one can usefully compare this text with 18:21-22, which is its direct-speech counterpart, i.e. instruction versus execution.

Peace and all good.
Alviero Niccacci
Please, in your reply put the addressee name in the subject
=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=
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
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Professors Email  mailto:sbfnet AT netvision.net.il
Students Email mailto:sbfstud AT netvision.net.il
o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o