Biblical Hebrew Forum

[furuli AT online.no]

Dear Dave,

I have a list of several hundred examples of WAYYIQTOLs whose actions 
occur simultaneously, even many examples where two WAYYIQTOLs have 
the same subject.  So it is true that the WAYYIQTOL advances R-time 
in the majority (more than half) of the cases, but this is no 
*semantic* characteristic of the form.


Best regards

Rolf


Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo



> On Saturday 13 March 2004 06:24, B. M. Rocine wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >  For years now--can you believe how time flies?-- this has been a difficult
> >  feature of your model for me to swallow: that a wayyiqtol that you alledge
> >  to be imperfective is used most often in a context that features the
> >  advance of time.  In my understanding of aspect, the advance of time would
> >  favor, if not require, a perfective form.  But I may be understanding you.
> >  Let me see if I can explain, in your view, how an imperfective form can be
> >  used in a passage where story time advances.
> >
> >  Wayyiqtol refers to a situation that obtains (essentially saying that it
> >  begins) but the verb form doesn't by itself indicate anything about the
> >  situation's completion.  The verb form leaves, in and of itself, the
> >  situation open on the anterior end, because it is imperfective.  Then, in a
> >  text, along comes the next wayyiqtol, a new beginning.  A new beginning
> >  usually (but not necessarily) *implies* the ending of the previous
> >  situation.  IOW, one situation is now usually *inferred* to be complete
> >  simply because a new one has obtained or begun.
> >
> >  This view of wayyiqtol seems rather like that of S.R. Driver, no?
> [snip]
>
> Bryan,
> It actually sounds to me more like Galia Hatav's view that wayyiqtol advances
> R-time.
>
> --
> Dave Washburn
> http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
> Learning about Christianity from a non-Christian
> is like getting a kiss over the telephone.