Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Fw: WAYYIQTOL

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: George Athas <gathas AT hotkey.net.au>
  • Cc: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Fw: WAYYIQTOL
  • Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 03:57:07 -0800

On 10/03/2004 22:09, George Athas wrote:

I concur with the possibility of the thesis that the Masoretes invented the
difference between conventional waw /we-/ and consecutive waw /wa-/. I'm not
sure of its veracity, but it is certainly plausible.

The reason for the possibility stems from the necessary difference between
Imperfect Yiqtol and the Preterite Yiqtol -- a point that cannot be made
more strongly. The distinction between these two verb types is seen
primarily in those weak roots which appear shorter in the Preterite than in
the Imperfect (eg, III-Heh roots). ...


So, George, just to clarify: are you saying that there are in fact two different verb forms, as clearly seen with 3-He etc roots, but that before the Masoretes these were distinct only in certain verbs? Clearly they were written the same in unpointed texts. Are you saying that they were also pronounced the same, until the Masoretes? If so, that conflicts with the general picture of the Masoretes as careful recorders of what they heard. I wonder why they departed so blatantly from their regular practice on this one.

Anyway, it seems to me that the distinction between WEYA`ASEH and WAYYA`AS is clear, even in the unpointed text, and cannot be explained as a purely phonetic matter. I suppose it is just possible that the distinction was some kind of "linguistic convention" without semantic significance as Rolf suggests (i.e. one form was always used in a past context and the other always in non-past but without actually "meaning" past or non-past), although I have never heard of such a situation in any other language. The usual situation in languages is that a distinction of verb forms (which is not free variation) signals a semantic distinction, and without further clear evidence I think we can reasonably assume that this is true of this distinction.


--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page