Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Galia Hatav <ghatav AT aall.ufl.edu>]

Dear Rolf and Dave,

Why do you think that the verb 'come' appearing after L:BIL:TIY is in
qatal? Morphologically speaking it has the form of the imperative (second
person masculine plural), which, of course, is odd.  (But not that odd
since you would expect here a modal form.) I have not checked other
versions, but the pointing in our version suggests that it is not a qatal.
>Rolf,
>> Dear list-members,
>>
>> The RSV rendering of the verse is: "If they are prophets, and if the word
>> of the LORD is with them, then let them intercede (YIQTOL jussive) with the
>> LORD of hosts, that the vessels which are left in the house of the LORD, in
>> the house of the king of Judah, and in Jerusalem may not go (QATAL) to
>> Babylon."
>>
>> Is the reference time of the QATAL after speech time (=future), and is the
>> verb modal? Or is it past indicative, as those sticking to traditional
>> grammar would expect of a QATAL?
>
>In my approach, which is an amalgam of my own ideas and Galia
>Hatav's, qatal is indicative with a syntactic connection to what
>precedes.  In this case it looks like result:  "Let them
>intercede...so that the vessels will not depart..." The problem is the
>preceding word, L:BIL:TIY, "lest."  This word with an indicative is an
>oddity that even the manuscripts noticed, since BHS suggests
>following the minority mss and reading YFBOW)U.  How many
>other examples of a qatal after L:BIL:TIY do you know of?  I lean
>toward the yiqtol reading, though I wouldn't go to the stake for it.
>
>Dave Washburn
>http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
>"Ich veranlassenarbeitenworken mein Mojo."
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: ghatav AT aall.ufl.edu
>To unsubscribe, forward this message to
>$subst('Email.Unsub')
>To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.