Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Bryan Rocine" <brocine AT earthlink.net>]

Hi Bill, you wrote:

> <Bryan>
> >>I would say the absence of noun to specify the clitic
pronoun subject
> of vayyaxshabeha serves to preserve *the believing* as the
dominant
> focal element in both clauses.
>
> <Bill>
> Is it *in the realm of possibility* that the absence of a
noun to
> specify "promise" could lead one to understand "promising"
as the
> dominant focal element? Ie: "it" refering to God's
promising?
>

A speaker assumes his audience shares certain information
with him.  Furthermore, he is in a partnership with his
audience that requires the audience to hold some of the
shared information in a state of activation.  The speaker
then adds new information to what he assumes is shared and
active.

This is not to say that a speaker is always correct in his
assumptions.  He may assume his audience is with him when
they are lost.  He may be a poor writer, or the audience may
be slow or inattentive or something.  We moderns, as an
audience, may lack a fluent management of the linguistic
conventions that were second nature to the BH writer and his
contemporary audience.  In all cases, if the partnership is
not attended to, communication breaks down.

One way a speaker, particularly the narrator of Biblical
prose, reveals his assumptions to us about what is shared
and active is by what he *underspecifies.*  In the case of
Gen 15:6, for better or worse, the writer is assuming we
know who is doing the xabashing (accounting).  While he may
be assuming on grounds to which we moderns are unaccustomed,
if he is a good writer, he makes the assumption with a good
reason.  We moderns have to be in touch with the linguistic
conventions a good writer of BH uses to justify his
assumptions.  Given the string of vayyiqtol verbs without a
change of subject before and after vayyaxshabeha in vv. 5
(vayyotse'--vayyo'mer--vayyo'mer) and 7 (vayyo'mer), I think
the writer is counting on us to know the subject of
vayyaxshabeha is also YHVH.  If vayyaxshabeha has Abraham as
subject, it would seem that the writer would have to be
violating the rule of partnership with his readers.  Short
of saying he is a poor writer, I find that unlikely.

The weqatal verb in v. 6 looks all the more interesting
given this explanation of the underspecified.

Hoping to help, Bryan

B. M. Rocine
Associate Pastor
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13206

(office) 315-437-6744
(home) 315-445-3085