Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
  • To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3
  • Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 07:53:10 -0600


> On 03:38 PM 16/08/2002 -0600, Dave Washburn wrote:
> > > Dave, I am simply repeating what I have heard about this from a
> > > colleague, who has a Ph.D. in linguistics. I am not trying to claim that
> > > WAYYIQTOL is always consecutive, simply that it often is, and that there
> > > is no reason to interpret it otherwise either in Gen 1:3 or in the
> > > opening verses of historical books which continue the historical
> > > narrative.
> >
> >But that's precisely the point: "often is" doesn't account for all
> >usages. Syntax generally has some kind of unifying factor, some
> >common thread within a form's usage that explains all, or virtually
> >all, instances (idiomatic usages, such as Mark's historic present,
> >may provide exceptions but don't really negate the unifying-factor
> >principle). In the HB, it is not the *form* of the wayyiqtol that
> >denotes sequence, but the *context* in which it most commonly
> >appears. It also appears in other nonsequential contexts - relatively
> >often in fact, so such contexts do not appear to be aberrations or
> >idiomatic - which strongly suggests that its unifying factor is
> >something other than sequentiality. Again, the biggest problem with
> >recent studies of it is that sequentiality is assumed, then
> >nonsequential occurrences are manipulated to fit the sequence
> >mold. I submit that if we want to progress in our understanding of
> >the Hebrew verb system, it's time to throw away the mold and look
> >for a new one.
>
> Dave, I believe the "unifying factor" is that the wayyiqtol form moves the
> narrative forward - it is essentially the glue that holds together the
> narrative. Now since narrative tells a story and stories are inherently
> sequential, this mean that most wayyiqtol forms are sequential. However,
> narrated stories often have "flashbacks" and "closeups", hence the
> pluperfect and epexegetical usages.

I'm expecting some of our discourse colleagues to pounce on this,
because according to DA, these "flashbacks" and "closeups"
normally use other verb forms, most notably qatal. However, you do
accurately point out that "narrative tells a story and stories are
inherently sequential," which strengthens my point that it is the
genre, not the verb form, that determines sequentiality. Thank you
for making my case for me.

Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page