Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Peter Kirk"<peter_kirk AT sil.org>]

See some comments below.

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator 
_________________________________
Subject: More ?'s about verbs
Author:  <dukerk AT appstate.edu> at Internet
Date:    15/01/2000 12:45


Dear Colleagues,

A few questions and trial balloons for the experts, not theories that I 
am trying to argue:

1) Regarding the discussion about the function of wayyiqtol in terms of 
sequentiality (or non-sequentiality), that is the thesis that it 
possibly does not connect backwards but begins a new reference time, and 
still may be used in a narrative sequence:

I wonder if the conjunction functions like the English phrase ?now 
then.?  It seems to me that in English people use ?now then? to start a 
new story, to pick up after some digression in a story, and even to list 
a series of events.

PK: Not really. Could you translate 1 Kings 2:40:

"Now then Shimei arose (WAYYIQTOL). Now then he saddled (WAYYIQTOL) a 
donkey. Now then he went (WAYYIQTOL) to Achish in Gath, to search (INF 
CONSTR) for his slaves. Now then Shimei went (WAYYIQTOL). Now then he 
brought (WAYYIQTOL) his slaves from Gath."

No, this verse is not five new stories but an extract from one story, 
with no digressions.


2) What then, if the conjunction found with wayyiqtol is some kind of 
narrative conjunction that is distinct from the conjunction of simple 
waw?  Is there any comparative philological evidence that might support 
such a thesis?  (I've seen a little about the Arabic ?fa,? but don't 
know how much weight it carries.)

Is it possible that yiqtol is modal (ala Hatav) and that we have two 
conjunctions:
Waw + yiqtol -> weyiqtol and remains modal
Waw + ?definite marker? (perhaps ha) + yiqtol -> wayyiqtol and now 
becomes non-modal and is used in past narration?

PK: Interesting idea.


3) Or another slant altogether, for the experts in phonology:
I realize that the morphological difference between the short and long 
prefixed conjugations disappeared by 1100 BCE; however R. Buth on this 
list and others argue for the continued existence of the preterite.  How 
does that thesis work with what you are discovering about phonology?  Is 
there a form of the conjunction (i.e. waw with or without an a-class 
vowel) that could explain:

wa+ *yaqtula evolving into weyiqtol (propretonic reduction?), and

wa + *yaqtul (preterite) evolving into wayyiqtol?

If something like this would make sense phonologically, then I could see 
how the ?preterite? would still be used in historical narrative even 
after its linguistic roots were long forgotten.

PK: The morphological distinction disappeared in only some verbs, the 
majority I agree, but that does not mean that they were not 
distinguished. Compare the English past simple and past participle 
e.g. "gave" and "given": in most verbs these have long been identical 
e.g. "had" but their meaning remains distinct and normally their forms 
are carefully distinguished in those verbs which have separate forms, 
though one sometimes sees confusion e.g. "begun" for "began".


4) Another question, for the historical linguists:
In the development of the prefixed and suffixed conjunctions is it 
possible that:

pronominal element + verbal root emphasized the person and the verbal 
idea was action (i.e. ?I do action X?), and

verbal root + pronominal element created a kind of genitival 
relationship which nominalized the action (i.e. ?Action X of me?) 
(resulting in what Rocine has advocated for the difference between 
yiqtol and qatal)?

PK: I guess this one goes a long way back into the mists of time, 
given that the prefix vs. suffix conjugation distinction seems to go 
back to common Afro-asiatic e.g. it is found in Berber languages (so I 
understand).


Thanks for any input.  I sure wish one of you experts would figure out 
the Hebrew verbal system conclusively.

--
Rodney K. Duke
Dept. of Phil. & Rel., Appalachian State Univ., Boone, NC 28608 
(O) 828-262-3091, (FAX) 828-262-6619, dukerk AT appstate.edu



---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: Peter_Kirk AT sil.org
To unsubscribe, forward this message to 
leave-b-hebrew-14207U AT franklin.oit.unc.e
du
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.