Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Dave Washburn wrote:

>> I accept WELO-NOTAR as a difficult form which needs close study.
>
>Holladay, following K-B, lists this form as a hiph`il yiqtol and
>specifically refers to 2 Sam 17:12, with the parenthesis "oth.: nif.
>pf."  Since the clause is clearly referring to intention and not past,
>which I see as modal, I suspect that Holladay is correct and it's
>another yiqtol 1cp.
>
>Thus, wrt nimcf, I see it as a yiqtol "wherever we may find [them],"
>and wrt welo' notar, I see this also as a yiqtol, "we won't leave a
>single one alive."



Dear Dave,

I think Holloday is a good example of how people holding traditional
viewpoints defend these with questionable means. Formally speaking, NOTAR
*may* be a YIQTOL, and in that case it must be a Hiphil Jussive; a Hiphil
indicative would be NOTIR. However, there are several reasons to reject the
view that NOTAR is a Hiphil Jussive:

(1) We would not expect a Jussive after LO, but an indicative, just as in
Exodus 12:10, and Leviticus 22:30
(2) The only examples of YTR in Hiphil Jussive are Genesis 49:4 and Exodus
16:19, and they do not parallel 2 Samuel 17:12.
(3) The expression "to be left" expressed by Niphal perfect is attested
several times, both with present and future meaning. All these examples are
parallel to 2 Samuel 17:12

2 Sam 9:1 "Is there yet any left of the house of Saul"  Present
2 Sam 13:30 "not one of them is left" Present
2 Sam 17:12 "not any of his men will be left alive" Future (The passage
under discussion)
1 Kings 9:21 "their sons who were left after them" Present
1 Kings 18:22 "I am left"  Present
Isaiah 30:17 "until you are left" Future
Ezekiel 14:22 "there shall be left in it escaping ones" Future
Nehemiah 6:1 "Not a gap was left in it" Present
2 Chronicles 8:8 "their sons who were left" Present.

The above points together with Peter's fine arguments regarding NIMCA makes
a strong case for two QATALs in the same verse with future meaning. I am
wondering why so many people with tooth and nail fight against the view
that QATALs without WE cannot have future meaning when none of these people
(at least this seems to be the case) has systematically looked at all the
QATALs of the Bible and evaluated their temporal meaning.


Regards
Rolf


Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo





>